Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iran Is Already Violating the Nuke Deal
Frontpagemagazine ^ | August 20, 2015 | Joseph Klein

Posted on 08/20/2015 4:36:30 AM PDT by SJackson

Will enough Democrats put country over party and defy Obama?

As the congressional vote on President Barack Obama’s disastrous nuclear deal with Iran draws closer, the Iranian regime appears to be doing everything it can to show that it has the upper hand as a result of the deal it negotiated with the United States and its five partners. It is either dishonestly twisting certain terms of the deal to justify its misbehavior or simply defying the terms outright. President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry are not pushing back. Instead, they are pushing hard to avoid a veto-proof congressional vote of disapproval.

For example, Iran is planning to sign a contract for four advanced Russian surface-to-air S-300 missiles as early as next week, following a visit to Moscow by Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani in violation of an international travel ban.

There have been whimpers of objection from the Obama administration, but no forceful statement that such activities by the Iranian regime will jeopardize the agreement from the get-go.

Iranian leaders have also declared that their arms shipments to allies in the region, such as their terrorist proxy Hezbollah, will continue despite the United Nations Security Council arms embargo still in effect for the next five years.

The Obama administration’s response is staggering. According to Kerry, “The arms embargo is not tied to snapback. It is tied to a separate set of obligations. So they are not in material breach of the nuclear agreement for violating the arms piece of it.”

That is all the encouragement the Iranian regime needed to up the ante. According to Debkafile, “Al Qods commander Gen. Qassem Soleimani, acting on the orders of Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, this week set up a new Iranian command to fight Israel.” This newly named “Eastern Command” is reportedly set “to start handing out weapons, including missiles, to any Palestinian West Bank group willing to receive them.” This is the same Soleimani with American blood on his hands who recently visited Moscow in violation of the current international travel ban, but who will eventually have sanctions and freezes against him lifted as part of the nuclear deal.

Meanwhile, to make matters even worse, the Associated Press is reporting that “Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of using to develop nuclear arms, operating under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work.” In other words, the UN international inspection team that President Obama has pointed to as the chief verification safeguard will now give way at least in part to Iranian inspectors investigating their own alleged nuclear weaponization development work at a military site declared off limits by Iran to international inspectors. The White House remained “confident” in the viability of the inspection regime despite the confidence game the Iranian regime played with the UN to permit Iran to self-inspect.

Nevertheless, Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives are lining up to support President Obama’s disastrous nuclear deal with Iran. They are willfully ignoring clear evidence that Iran, post-deal, is continuing its pattern of cheating and violating international sanctions and embargoes still in place. Like lemmings jumping over the cliff, these Democrats are willing to ease the Iranian regime’s path towards becoming a threshold nuclear armed state in a little over a decade, out of blind partisan loyalty to Obama.

To date, the Obama administration has the declared support of 23 Democratic and nominally “independent” senators it will need to sustain an expected veto by President Obama of any resolution passed by Congress to disapprove the deal. This tally is according to The Hill’s Senate whip list compiled as of August 18th. The administration needs at least 34 senators on Obama’s side to sustain a veto. Six Democratic senators are said to be leaning towards a favorable vote, including Senator Richard Blumenthal (Conn.). Fifteen Senate Democrats are still undecided.

So far, only two Democratic senators have shown the courage to serve the public interest, rather than narrow partisan interests. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) became the second Democratic senator to announce his willingness to vote against the president from his own party in opposition to the nuclear deal with Iran. Senator Chuck Schumer had announced his opposition on August 6th.

On the House side, according to The Hill’s Whip List as of August 19th, 55 Democratic representatives have indicated that they are planning to vote in support of the deal. Fourteen more Democrats are leaning in favor. Twelve have declared their opposition to the deal so far. Three are leaning against and 57 are listed as undecided. Obama will prevail on a vote to sustain his expected veto of a disapproval resolution that passes both houses of Congress if he loses no more than 43 House Democrats (assuming the Republicans in the House all vote to override the veto).

Speaking at Seton Hall University’s School of Diplomacy and International Relations on August 18th when he announced his opposition to the nuclear deal with Iran, Senator Menendez provided a very detailed explanation of his decision. He characterized the fundamental flaw in the deal this way: “The agreement that has been reached failed to achieve the one thing it set out to achieve – it failed to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state at a time of its choosing. In fact, it authorizes and supports the very road map Iran will need to arrive at its target.”

Senator Menendez objected to the exchange of permanent sanctions relief for Iran in return for “only temporary – temporary – limitations on its nuclear program – not a rolling-back, not dismantlement, but temporary limitations.” The deal, the senator added, “is based on ‘hope.’ Hope is part of human nature, but unfortunately it is not a national security strategy."

Senator Menendez also took a swipe at President Obama’s attempt to tie opponents of his deal to supporters of the 2003 war in Iraq. “Unlike President Obama's characterization of those who have raised serious questions about the agreement, or who have opposed it,” the senator said, “I did not vote for the war in Iraq, I opposed it, unlike the Vice President and the Secretary of State, who both supported it.”

. The New Jersey senator reminded his audience that the purpose of the negotiations from the U.S. perspective had been “to dismantle all -- or significant parts -- of Iran's illicit nuclear infrastructure to ensure that it would not have nuclear weapons capability at any time. Not shrink its infrastructure. Not limit it. But fully dismantle Iran’s nuclear weapons capability.”

Senator Menendez cataloged examples of early assurances from the Obama administration of red lines that were later wiped away. For example, Secretary of State John Kerry had declared in the early days of engaging with Iran that Arak, Iran's plutonium reactor, would be dismantled. That is not the case under the deal Obama and Kerry signed off on. The underground Fordow enrichment facility was to be closed. That too was not part of the final deal. The Iranians, Senator Menendez said, were supposed “to come absolutely clean about their weaponization activities at Parchin [their military facility] and agree to promise anytime anywhere inspections.” That too, in Senator Menendez’s words, “fell by the wayside.” Now we have learned that the Iranians will be able to self-inspect.

In addition, not even one existing centrifuge will be destroyed. Some are just being disconnected. Thousands will remain in operation. Research and development on centrifuges will be permitted to continue even during the first ten years of the deal.

“While I have many specific concerns about this agreement, my overarching concern is that it requires no dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and only mothballs that infrastructure for 10 years,” Senator Menendez explained. “We lift sanctions, and -- at year eight -- Iran can actually start manufacturing and testing advanced IR-6 and IR-8 centrifuges that enrich up to 15 times the speed of its current models. At year 15, Iran can start enriching uranium beyond 3.67 percent – the level at which we become concerned about fissile material for a bomb. At year 15, Iran will have NO limits on its uranium stockpile.”

Under the deal, Iran will get significant sanctions relief within the first year, while its obligations stretch out for a decade or more. And there is a major concession in the deal that has gotten very little attention to date. Iran’s negotiators out-maneuvered Secretary of State Kerry’s team into conceding away the right to re-impose or extend U.S. sanctions beyond their expiration date. Senator Menendez noted that "we will have to refrain from reintroducing or reimposing the Iran Sanctions Act I authored – which expires next year -- that acted significantly to bring Iran to the table in the first place."

Iran has agreed only to provisionally apply the Additional Protocol to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons that is supposed to ensure continuing access to suspect sites in a country, and only formally adopt it when Congress has abolished all sanctions.

Senator Menendez, like Senator Schumer, dismisses the either-or choice between Obama’s deal and war, which Obama and his supporters are offering as a red herring. “If there is a fear of war in the region,” said Senator Menendez, “it is fueled by Iran and its proxies and exacerbated by an agreement that allows Iran to possess an industrial-sized nuclear program, and enough money in sanctions relief to continue to fund its hegemonic intentions throughout the region."

The senator suggested offering Iran some limited inducements to return to the negotiating table, and outlined some parameters that the Obama administration should follow in seeking better terms. These include “the immediate ratification by Iran of the Additional Protocol to ensure that we have a permanent international arrangement with Iran for access to suspect sites,” closing the Fordow enrichment facility, resolving the ‘possible military dimensions’ of Iran’s program” before there can be any permanent sanctions relief, banning centrifuge R&D for the duration of the agreement, and extending to at least 20 years the duration of the agreement.

Senator Menendez also wants to extend the authorization of the Iran Sanctions Act beyond its expiration in 2016 “to ensure that we have an effective snapback option.” And he wants a clear declaration of U.S. policy by the President and Congress that “we will use all means necessary to prevent Iran from producing enough enriched uranium for a nuclear bomb, as well as building or buying one, both during and after any agreement.”

Unfortunately, the procedure for congressional involvement with the nuclear deal has turned the Constitution’s treaty ratification process on its head. Instead of requiring a two-thirds vote of the Senate to ratify the nuclear deal if had been handled as a treaty, President Obama will get his way unless both houses of Congress override his veto of a disapproval resolution by a two-thirds vote. Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that opponents of the nuclear deal will likely lose in a vote to override an Obama veto. Why the Republican majority in the Senate ever agreed to such a legislative trap is beyond comprehension.

Regardless of the eventual outcome, at the very least the leaders of the House and Senate must insist that a resolution of disapproval be voted upon on the merits. Each representative and senator should be required to go on the record in a roll-call vote, indicating his or her vote of yea or nay. This means that Democrats in the Senate should not be permitted to hide behind a filibuster to avoid an up-or-down vote. If the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster and allow a majority of the Senate to pass or reject a disapproval resolution is not attainable, Senate Majority Leader McConnell must stand up and take a page out of former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s playbook. Senator McConnell should deploy the so-called "nuclear option.” This would mean eliminating the filibuster that could otherwise be used by Democrats to block a vote on what is likely to be a once-in-a-lifetime agreement with life and death consequences for national security.

If the Democratic senators supporting President Obama’s deal believe that it is the only realistic alternative to war, then they should have the backbone to put their names on the record in support of the deal. If they try to duck their legislative responsibility to their constituents and the nation, then Senator McConnell must act promptly to take away their filibuster fig leaf. If Senator McConnell does not move aggressively in this direction as and when necessary, he will show as much cravenness as the Democrats exploiting the filibuster.


TOPICS: Israel; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: g42; iaea; iran; iraniannukes; israel; lebanon; waronterror

1 posted on 08/20/2015 4:36:30 AM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
Middle East and terrorism, occasional political and Jewish issues Ping List. High Volume

If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.

..................

2 posted on 08/20/2015 4:43:21 AM PDT by SJackson (C Matthews: should NY State recognize gay marriage? Sen Clinton: "No!" The crowd booed, 2002)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Obama’s Nuke Deal is a poorly disguised license to nuke Israel. That’s all.


3 posted on 08/20/2015 4:54:13 AM PDT by x_plus_one (But how do you know I'm human? Oh, maybe because I'm a cylon and havent seen you at any meetings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

For many Democrats, party loyalty and hatred for the US are the guiding lights of their sad, demented, lives. They will sustain Obama’s veto even if they found a secret side deal where Obama actually promised to ship warheads and delivery systems to Iran IMO.


4 posted on 08/20/2015 5:12:02 AM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

“Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that opponents of the nuclear deal will likely lose in a vote to override an Obama veto. Why the Republican majority in the Senate ever agreed to such a legislative trap is beyond comprehension. “

This guy has done NOTHING to stop ANYTHING this administration has done . I expect nothing different this time around . He is part of the problem .


5 posted on 08/20/2015 5:21:10 AM PDT by Lera (Proverbs 29:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lera

John Kerry, Obama and Hillary Clinton. The three biggest communists ever to grace Washington DC. Heck, Bernie Sanders is Alexander Haig compared to these three.


6 posted on 08/20/2015 5:41:05 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz ("Hillary, you magnificent b**ch! I read your book!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

INSANITY!

Trump calls our leaders STUPID I agree but they are more aptly described as Insanely Stupid, McConnell says this insanity can not be stopped, we the people are insane if let this stand.

We have the constitutional authority to DEPOSE this insane tyrannical gov’t, yet we sit and watch, is this not also insanity, have we not doomed ourselves to damnation as a nation.


7 posted on 08/20/2015 6:18:39 AM PDT by PoloSec ( Believe the Gospel: how that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PoloSec
Our criminal government is riddled with commies, thieves, criminals and syncopants. Our “leaders” are quislings. Pathetic state of affairs.
8 posted on 08/20/2015 6:36:30 AM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Obummer gets his legacy.


9 posted on 08/20/2015 6:50:02 AM PDT by depressed in 06 (America conceived in liberty, dies in slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Lets face it Obama has sold the country out. Every move he is making is to the detriment of the USA. His hatred of this country has no bounds.


10 posted on 08/20/2015 6:53:36 AM PDT by JayAr36 (A land without borders is not a country. So where did America go?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
This was settled when 99 traitors approved it, all this is just noise to make people think our favorite senator tried to stop it.

Tom Cotton, a man that stood up to the 99.

11 posted on 08/20/2015 7:10:50 AM PDT by itsahoot (55 years a republican-Now Independent. Will write in Sarah Palin, no matter who runs. RIH-GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lera
This guy has done NOTHING to stop ANYTHING this administration has done . I expect nothing different this time around

He did not do nothing. If he had not brought the Corker bill to the floor none of this would have happened. We can no longer assign these traitorous acts to stupidity, they are what they are. Traitorous.

12 posted on 08/20/2015 7:14:43 AM PDT by itsahoot (55 years a republican-Now Independent. Will write in Sarah Palin, no matter who runs. RIH-GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Can somebody grow a pair and deal with them?


13 posted on 08/20/2015 7:16:40 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Not to worry SJ, they will police themselves and we’ll be OK. The UN and the current administration guarantee it.


14 posted on 08/20/2015 7:30:06 AM PDT by Blue Collar Christian (Ready for Teddy, Cruz that is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

“There have been whimpers of objection from the Obama administration, but no forceful statement that such activities by the Iranian regime will jeopardize the agreement from the get-go.”

Now just a cotton pickin’ minit here. Let’s be fair. It’s not as if they built an apartment building in Gilo or anything.


15 posted on 08/20/2015 3:36:22 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (End the occupation. Annex today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson