Aug 20th 2015

Ten Reasons Why Opposing Iran Nuclear Deal is Bad Politics for Dems, Bad Policy for America

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.
Many of the same people who rushed America to War with Iraq are now engaged in a no-holds-barred campaign to convince a small group of House and Senate Democrats that they should vote to kill President Obama’s Iran Nuclear Agreement when Congress returns in September.
 
But the fact is that opposing the Iran Nuclear Deal is horrible politics for Democrats.
   If it were defeated, it would be even worse from America – and, by the way, for Israel.

The case is made succinctly in a new video by Americans United for Change:



First, the politics.
 
Reason #1: Polls show that everyday Americans – and especially Democrats – overwhelmingly support the agreement, and they have been supportive of the process that led to the agreement for many months.
 
A Public Policy Polling nationwide poll taken July 23-24 found 54% of the public supported the nuclear agreement with Iran and only 38% opposed. 
 
According to PPP:
 
Democratic voters (75/17) are far more united in their favor for the agreement than Republicans (36/54) were in their opposition to it. Voters within every gender, race, and age group are in support of it.
 
Similarly, 54% of voters want their members of Congress to vote to allow the agreement to move forward, compared to just 39% who would like to see it blocked.
    
It may surprise some pundits that an even greater number of Jewish voters support the deal.  According to a poll by GBA Strategies for J Street, a progressive pro-Israel lobbying group, Jewish voters support the deal by a 20-point margin – 60% in favor and 40% against.  Jewish voters strongly support action by Congress to approve the agreement.
 
And in New York City, where several Democrats are still undecided about their support for the agreement, a PPP poll taken last week found that 59% of the city’s voters want their Member of Congress to allow the deal to go forward, compared to only 33% who do not.
 
In New York City, of course, most key electoral races for Democrats are Democratic primaries.   Far from experiencing a backlash if they support the Iran deal, Democratic Members of Congress will likely benefit.  In fact, 54% of voters say they are more likely to vote for someone who supports the agreement, while only 25% say they’d be less likely to.
 
Reason #2: If the Iran deal goes into effect at the beginning of October as it is supposed to do, every indication is that it will be going very well by the time any Members of Congress face the voters in either a Primary or General Election.
 
The interim agreement that froze Iran’s nuclear program during the 18 months of negotiation that preceded the consummation of the final agreement was derided by Neo-Cons at the time it was signed.  They argued that Iran would never adhere to its terms and it would collapse. 
 
Not only did it not collapse, but many of those same voices thought it was working so well by early this year that they urged the U.S. to scrap the negotiations in favor of trying to maintain the interim deal that that they had earlier excoriated. 
 
By next spring, there is every reason to believe that the same will be true with the permanent agreement.
 
There is no danger that a vote for the Iran agreement will create a nightmare scenario by the next election.  But there is a very high likelihood that if Congress rejects the deal, America could be facing a major foreign policy disaster by next year that will be hung directly around the necks of those voting no.  More on those consequences in a moment.
 
Reason #3: Many of the Democrats who oppose the Iran Deal, or are undecided about their support, fear a backlash from a very small group of influential Democratic donors and bundlers.
 
But many of them ignore the rise of a whole new group of progressive Democratic donors – and progressive Jewish donors – that are just as committed to supporting the agreement as opponents are to stopping it.  J-Street – the progressive alternative to AIPAC – has exploded in size over the last five years.  From the point of view of fundraising and political support, these donors represent the future for Democratic Members of Congress.
 
What’s more, many progressive Democratic donors have made it clear that they will refuse to support opponents of the deal in the next cycle. 
 
Reason #4: Democrats who oppose the deal will be isolating themselves from the vast majority of Democratic voters (including Jewish Democratic voters), from the overwhelming majority of Democratic Members of Congress, from the House Democratic Leadership and from the Democratic President.
 
That isn’t good politics for anyone who wants to have influence within the Democratic caucuses of the House or Senate – or the White House.
 
Reason #5: The organized progressive community within the Democratic Party is every bit as intense in their support for this agreement as the small number of opponents. 
 
Opponents of the deal are likely to alienate these organizations and their leadership for years to come and to bear the brunt of intense criticism from groups that have no compunction inflicting political costs onto Democrats who they believe have betrayed their principles.
 
Reason #6: Most importantly, Democrats who vote against the Iran Agreement will ultimately find themselves on the wrong side of history.  
 
This vote is an “Iraq War” moment that will fundamentally define Members of Congress for the rest of their careers. 
 
Thirteen years later, there are not many Democrats in Congress who voted in favor of the Iraq War and are glad they took that vote.  Many of them have paid a steep political price for allowing themselves to be rushed into war by many of the same people who today are urging that the Iran Agreement be stopped.
 
There are simply no alternatives to this agreement other than a nuclear Iran or military conflict.   If the U.S. Congress stops this agreement, our partners will end sanctions and we will get nothing in return from Iran.  The hard-liners in Iran will be emboldened and will argue that the U.S. never really wanted a negotiated agreement and that the only way for Iran to protect itself is to actually build a nuclear bomb.
 
In that situation, it would likely require another war in the Middle East to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb– a war for which those who vote against this agreement will be held personally responsible.
 
Voting against this deal is horrible politics for Democrats.  It is even worse policy for America.
 
Reason #7: There is no “better deal.”  As Treasury Secretary Jack Lew made clear in the New York Times, those who argue that by unilaterally ramping up sanctions America could force Iran to dismantle its entire nuclear program – or even the character of the regime wholesale – are engaging in “dangerous fantasy” that flies in the face of economic and diplomatic reality.
 
The countries with the other major economies in the world joined us in a sanctions regime against Iran that was successful at bringing them to the bargaining table and producing an agreement that will prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb.  They participated because they believed that Iran’s nuclear program represented an uncontained threat to global security – and because we offered a specific path to a diplomatic solution.
 
Those countries believe we achieved our objective.  They all support the agreement – along with the UN Security Council and 90 other countries.   They believe – along with most nuclear experts – that the deal constrains the Iran nuclear program for the long term and ensures it is exclusively peaceful. 
 
They will not join us in going back to the negotiating table.  Their sanctions will simply end. 
 
The notion that the U.S. could somehow force other countries to re-impose sanctions by levying secondary sanctions on them also ignores economic reality.
 
Most of these countries, like the European Union, China, Japan, India and South Korea – and their companies – represent our trading partners and the largest economies in the world.  Secretary Lew points out that:
 
If we were to cut them off from the American dollar and our financial system, we would set off extensive financial hemorrhaging, not just in our partner countries but in the United States as well.
 
He continues:
 
The major importers of Iranian oil – China, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Turkey – together account for nearly a fifth of our goods exports and own 47% of foreign-held American treasuries.  They will not agree to indefinite economic sacrifices in the name of an illusory better deal.
 
Reason #8:  Nuclear experts say the deal has the toughest restrictions of any weapons agreement in history.
 
A letter authored by 29 of the world’s foremost experts in nuclear power and arms control says:
 
This is an innovative agreement, with much more stringent constraints than any previously negotiated non-proliferation framework.
 
They continue:
 
A key result of these restrictions is that it would take Iran many months to enrich uranium for a weapon. We contrast this with the situation before the interim agreement was negotiated in Lausanne: at that time Iran had accumulated enough 20 percent enriched uranium that the required additional enrichment time for weapons use was only a few weeks…..
 
Some have expressed concern that the deal will free Iran to develop nuclear weapons without constraint after ten years. In contrast we find that the deal includes important long-term verification procedures that last until 2040, and others that last indefinitely under the NPT and its Additional Protocol.
 
The signers of this letter include six Nobel laureates, one of the physicists who helped design the first hydrogen bomb, a former Director of the Los Alamos Weapons Laboratory (the facility that produced designs for most of the arms now in the nation’s nuclear arsenal), and the head of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.  In other words, these are people who actually know what is involved in building nuclear weapons – not just reading talking points produced by a political consulting firm.
 
Their views are echoed by more than 100 former Ambassadors from both parties who signed a letter to President Obama endorsing the deal – including five who had been ambassadors to Israel.
 
And while hawkish Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has convinced most elements in the Israeli political class to oppose the deal, the country’s national security class – and its scientists – supports the agreement.
 
Reason #9:  The inspection regime to prevent cheating is more robust than anything ever negotiated into an arms agreement. 
 
The agreement blocks any of the three paths Iran could use to get a nuclear weapon – uranium enrichment, production of plutonium or clandestine means. It would change the “breakout” time necessary for Iran to get a nuclear weapon from a matter of weeks to a year.
 
And if we do catch them cheating, it will be Iran that is isolated from the rest of the world – not the United States.
 
If they did cheat, there is a “snap back” provision that would actually result in the re-imposition of international sanctions.  And if the new sanctions weren’t enough we would have massively more intelligence and inspection data to use in planning military action.   Now we have virtually none.
 
If, on the other hand, the United States Congress sinks the deal, it will be America that is isolated and we would not be able to re-impose international sanctions at all.   We would have the worst of all worlds: no international sanctions, no international unity, emboldened hard liners in Iran, and no way to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon other than another Mid East War.
 
Reason #10: As Senator Joe Donnelly said in his announcement of support for the agreement:
 
I owe it to the men and women of our Armed Forces and to the people of Indiana to have exhausted every other option to stop Iran before we would consider putting any of our service members in harm’s way.
 
War is not just another “policy option.”   Once you launch military action, circumstances spin out of control and – as in Iraq – hundreds of thousands could die.  Just ask the men and women of our military how great it is to be part of a war – particularly part of a war of occupation in the Middle East.
 
And let us remember the General Colin Powell’s  “Pottery Barn rule”: “If you break it you own it.”
 
We spent at least two trillion dollars on the War in Iraq after we “broke it.”   And when we invaded Iraq, we kicked over the sectarian hornet’s nest that made way for ISIS.
 
Do we really want to try to occupy Iran – a country many times bigger than Iraq with a much more robust military?
 
Yet many of the people who are leading the campaign to block this agreement want the United States to take military action to achieve “regime change” in Iran. 
 
In an opinion piece in March in The New York Times, former Bush U.N. Ambassador and leading proponent of the Iraq War John Bolton wrote that when it came to Iran:
 
The inconvenient truth is that only military action ……can accomplish what is required.
 
Sound familiar?
 
That is exactly the kind of thinking that led America into the worst foreign policy disaster in half a century.  It is amazing that people like Bolton – who are personally responsible for that disaster – have the audacity to propose that America start yet another war in the Middle East. 
 
They were wrong about Iraq.  Now they are wrong about Iran.
 
They fooled America once.  Don’t let them fool us again.

 
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

Nov 30th 2021
EXTRACT: "So it could well be that, despite the faster spread of the infection, its ultimate health, social and economic impact proves negligible. We simply do not know at this point. But detecting more uncertainty than before, financial markets have reacted with panic. For example, the S&P500 tumbled 2.3% on Friday November 26 only to rise 1.1% on Monday November 29. Most markets gave up between 2% and 4%, which is a pretty substantial one-day fall."
Nov 28th 2021
EXTRACT: "Momentous changes are casting a long shadow on China. The country’s political system will soon undergo a profound reform, pending final approval (a quasi-formality) at next year’s congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC). President Xi Jinping, the Party chairman and the “navigator” of the country, has decided on a new course, abandoning the principle of collective leadership. Xi is leading China away from the path taken by Deng Xiaoping after the terror of the Cultural Revolution, and back toward a system of absolute rule by one person without term limits, as under Mao Zedong."
Nov 25th 2021
EXTRACTS: "”The biggest disappointment in Glasgow was the last-minute watering down of the proposed (and widely supported) agreement to “phase out” the use of coal in energy production. With India providing political cover for China in vetoing this language, the final conference proposal was to “phase down” coal”. ---- “China accounts for more than half of the world’s coal consumption, and has the largest amount of coal-fired generating capacity under construction. Pressed about why his country would not do more in Glasgow to help save the planet, China’s chief negotiator pointed to the commitments in the Communist Party of China’s current Five-Year Plan. So, our future now depends on the CPC’s program. The tragedy for the world is that the Party cannot be phased down, much less phased out, despite the fact that it is a huge threat to the future of all of us.” ------ “To save the planet, robust democratic leadership must be phased up – not phased down, let alone phased out. Rather than merely keeping our fingers crossed and hoping for the best, we should start by calling out the appalling behavior of dictatorships such as China and Russia.”
Nov 22nd 2021
EXTRACT: "The transitory inflation debate in the United States is over. The upsurge in US inflation has turned into something far worse than the Federal Reserve expected. Perpetually optimistic financial markets are taking this largely in stride. The Fed is widely presumed to have both the wisdom and the firepower to keep underlying inflation in check. That remains to be seen."
Nov 14th 2021
EXTRACT: "S&P projects that companies are planning to install 44 gigawatts of new solar in 2022. The year 2020, despite the onset of the pandemic, saw a record-breaking 19 gigawatts of new solar capacity installed in the U.S. So given the bids out there already, it appears that in 2022 solar installers will more than double their best year ever so far. The U.S. currently has 100 gigawatts of solar electricity-generating capacity, so in just one year we are poised to add nearly 50% of our current total. A gigawatt of power can provide electricity to about 750,000 homes. So the 44 new gigawatts we’ll put in next year have a nameplate capacity that would under ideal conditions allow them to power 33 million homes." ----- "Not only is there a lot of good news on the green energy front but there is good news in the bad news for fossil fuels. S&P finds that coal plants are being retired way before the utilities had expected. Some 29 gigawatts of coal retirements are expected from 2020 through 2025. "
Nov 3rd 2021
EXTRACT: "Zemmour’s way of thinking stems from a tradition going back to the French Revolution of 1789. Catholic conservatives and right-wing intellectuals, who hated the secular republic that emerged from the revolution, have long fulminated against liberals, cosmopolitans, immigrants, and other enemies of their idea of a society based on ethnic purity, obedience to the church, and family values. They were almost invariably anti-Semitic. When Jewish army Captain Alfred Dreyfus was falsely accused of betraying his country in the notorious scandal of the 1890s, they were on the side of Dreyfus’s accusers. ---- Germany’s invasion of France in 1940 gave reactionaries of this kind the chance to form a French puppet-government in Vichy. Zemmour has had kind things to say about the Vichy regime. He also has expressed some doubt about the innocence of Dreyfus. ---- None of these views would be surprising if they came from a far-right agitator like Jean-Marie Le Pen. But Zemmour is the son of Sephardic Jewish immigrants from Algeria who lived among the Muslim Berbers."
Oct 27th 2021
EXTRACT: "performed strongly in last month’s parliamentary and regional elections. Officially, Communist Party candidates took 18.9% of the popular vote for the State Duma (parliament), compared to nearly 49.8% for the Kremlin’s United Russia party. But the Communists refused to recognize the results, insisting that the vote was rigged. And, indeed, some experts estimate that they should have gotten around 30% of the vote, with United Russia taking about 35%."
Oct 22nd 2021
EXTRACT: "Powell was charismatic in the true sense of the term. Nowadays, this description is too often used to indicate an ability to attract supporters or generate celebrity interest. Internet lists of those who are regarded as charismatic include characters as varied as Adolf Hitler, Bono, Donald Trump, George Clooney, and Rihanna. But the ancient Greeks and Saint Paul used “charisma” to describe values-based leadership infused with a charm capable of inspiring devotion. The Greeks believed that this quality was a gift of grace, while Christian theology regarded it as a power given by the Holy Spirit."
Oct 17th 2021
EXTRACTS: "But property-sector woes are not the only economic danger China faces in 2021-22. The Chinese government’s mounting crackdown on the country’s burgeoning tech sector may pose an even greater threat." ---- "According to a recent study by McKinsey & Company, the share of Chinese urban employment supported by private enterprises more than quadrupled between 1995 and 2018, from just 18% to 87%. The share of exports generated by the private sector more than doubled over the same period, from 34% to 88%. And private-sector fixed-asset investment jumped from 42% to 65% of the total. The message in the data is clear: clamping down on the private sector and threatening innovators is not the way to ensure sustained rapid growth. Chinese entrepreneurs can read the writing on the wall. They understand that their political and regulatory room to maneuver is shrinking, and that the balance has shifted in favor of state-owned firms and public officials. And they understand that this uneasy atmosphere is likely to persist."
Oct 16th 2021
EXTRACT: "We designed a programme that incorporated data from over 300 million buildings and analysed 130 million km² of land – almost the entire land surface area of the planet. This estimated how much energy could be produced from the 0.2 million km² of rooftops present on that land, an area roughly the same size as the UK."
Oct 6th 2021
EXTRACT: "Britain in the 1950s was wedded to the US, acting as a partner rather than leading the charge. Now, while the UK continues to support the US, the influence it has seems negligible. While it may bring comfort to the UK to feel it is a partner to a superpower, being its stooge or subordinate is an unpleasant place to be, no matter how much you tell yourself it values your opinion."
Oct 6th 2021
EXTRACT: "That was then. Now, the Chinese government has doubled down, with President Xi Jinping throwing the full force of his power into a “common prosperity” campaign aimed at addressing inequalities of income and wealth. Moreover, the regulatory net has been broadened, not just to ban cryptocurrencies, but also to become an instrument of social engineering, with the government adding e-cigarettes, business drinking, and celebrity fan culture to its ever-lengthening list of bad social habits. All this only compounds the concerns I raised two months ago. The new dual thrust of Chinese policy – redistribution plus re-regulation – strikes at the heart of the market-based “reform and opening up” that have underpinned China’s growth miracle since the days of Deng Xiaoping in the 1980s. It will subdue the entrepreneurial activity that has been so important in powering China’s dynamic private sector, with lasting consequences for the next, innovations-driven, phase of Chinese economic development. Without animal spirits, the case for indigenous innovation is in tatters."
Oct 5th 2021
EXTRACT: "Wartime nostalgia plays an important part in Britain’s instinctive fondness for the special relationship. Like former Prime Minister Tony Blair in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, some British politicians might believe that the United Kingdom is the only European country with serious armed forces and the political will to use them. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, like Blair before him, seems to fancy himself a modern-day Churchill. Unfortunately (or not), Britain’s military power is insignificant compared to what Churchill could command in 1944. Wartime nostalgia has drawn Britain into several foolish American wars, which other European countries were wise to avoid."
Sep 24th 2021
EXTRACTS: "We have found that 47 million American adults – nearly 1 in 5 – agree with the statement that “the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump and Joe Biden is an illegitimate president.” Of those, 21 million also agree that “use of force is justified to restore Donald J. Trump to the presidency.” Our survey found that many of these 21 million people with insurrectionist sentiments have the capacity for violent mobilization. At least 7 million of them already own a gun, and at least 3 million have served in the U.S. military and so have lethal skills. Of those 21 million, 6 million said they supported right-wing militias and extremist groups, and 1 million said they are themselves or personally know a member of such a group, including the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys." ----- "..... the Jan. 6 insurrection represents a far more mainstream movement than earlier instances of right-wing extremism across the country. Those events, mostly limited to white supremacist and militia groups, saw more than 100 individuals arrested from 2015 to 2020. But just 14% of those arrested for their actions on Jan. 6 are members of those groups. More than half are business owners or middle-aged white-collar professionals, and only 7% are unemployed."
Sep 11th 2021
EXTRACT: "That long path, though, has from the start had within it one fundamental flaw. If we are to make sense of wider global trends in insecurity, we have to recognise that in all the analysis around the 9/11 anniversary there lies the belief that the main security concern must be with an extreme version of Islam. It may seem a reasonable mistake, given the impact of the wars, but it still misses the point. The war on terror is better seen as one part of a global trend which goes well beyond a single religious tradition – a slow but steady move towards revolts from the margins."
Sep 11th 2021
EXTRACTS: "Is it not extraordinary that in a country that claims to be as enlightened and advanced as ours, the combined wealth of three individuals – Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Microsoft founder Bill Gates, and investor Warren Buffett – exceeds the total wealth of the bottom half of Americans? One has to return to the days of the pharaohs of Egypt to find a parallel to the extreme wealth inequality that we see in in America today." ...... "The top tax rate remained above 90 percent through the 1950s and did not dip below 70 percent until 1981. At no point during the decades that saw America’s greatest economic growth did the tax on the wealthy drop below 70 percent. Today it is somewhere around 37 percent. President Biden’s American Families Plan would increase the top tax rate to 39.6 percent – a fairly modest alteration, albeit in the right direction. It is true that there was a time when the top marginal tax was even lower than it is today: in the years leading up to the Great Depression it hovered around 25 percent."
Sep 7th 2021
EXTRACT: "But Biden can’t be blamed for the rise of the Taliban, or the fragile state of a country that has seen far too many wars and invasions. The US should not have been there in the first place, but that is a lesson that great powers never seem to learn."
Sep 4th 2021
EXTRACT: "The world is only starting to grapple with how profound the artificial-intelligence revolution will be. AI technologies will create waves of progress in critical infrastructure, commerce, transportation, health, education, financial markets, food production, and environmental sustainability. Successful adoption of AI will drive economies, reshape societies, and determine which countries set the rules for the coming century." ----- "AI will reorganize the world and change the course of human history. The democratic world must lead that process."
Sep 1st 2021
EXTRACT: "Although the Fed is considering tapering its quantitative easing (QE), it will likely remain dovish and behind the curve overall. Like most central banks, it has been lured into a “debt trap” by the surge in private and public liabilities (as a share of GDP) in recent years. Even if inflation stays higher than targeted, exiting QE too soon could cause bond, credit, and stock markets to crash. That would subject the economy to a hard landing, potentially forcing the Fed to reverse itself and resume QE." ---- "After all, that is what happened between the fourth quarter of 2018 and the first quarter of 2019, following the Fed’s previous attempt to raise rates and roll back QE."
Sep 1st 2021
EXTRACT: "Today’s economic challenges are certainly solvable, and there is no reason why inflation should have to spike."