Sen. Tom Cotton, (R-Arkansas)
Posted on 03/10/2015 5:37:06 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Sen. Tom Cotton, (R-Arkansas)
(CNSNews.com) - Just as President Obama repeatedly has defied congressional authority on immigration and other domestic matters, now 47 members of Congress are defying the president as he tries to negotiate a deal with Iran to curtail its nuclear program. And the Obama administration is outraged.
On Monday, in an "Open Letter to the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran," Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and 46 other Republican senators explained two features of the U.S. Constitution that Iran's leaders "should seriously consider" as they negotiate with the Obama administration and its international partners:
First, they wrote, Congress must ratify international agreements negotiated by the president: "Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement," the letter said.
And second, any agreement with Iran that is not approved by Congress will be regarded "as nothing more than an executive agreement between President Obama and Ayatollah Khamenei. The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time."
On Tuesday, Cotton said he and 46 Republican colleagues "are simply speaking for the American people."
"The point we're making to Iran's leaders...is that if Congress doesn't approve a deal, Congress won't accept a deal, now or in the future," Cotton told MSNBC's "Morning Joe."
"This is about stopping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. And Iran's leaders need to understand that any deal that gives them a path to a bomb -- today, tomorrow, ten years, fifteen years from now -- will not be accepted by the United States Congress."
President Obama on Monday called it "kind of ironic to see some members of Congress wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran. It's an unusual coalition." Obama said he will continue to focus on trying to get a deal with Iran.
But Cotton and other Republicans don't trust the Obama administration to reach a satisfactory deal, and they insist that any agreement with Iran be subject to the Senate's advice and consent.
Cotton has described the administration's negotiations with Iran as "an endless series of concessions" that will "empower our enemies and put our national security at risk."
Vice President Joe Biden on Monday slammed Cotton and the 46 other Republicans for trying to undermine a sitting president in the midst of sensitive negotiations. Biden called it beneath the dignity of the Senate.
But Cotton on Tuesday dismissed Biden's criticism: "If Joe Biden so respects the dignity of the institution of the Senate, he should be insisting that the president submit any deal to approval of the Senate, which is exactly what he did on numerous deals during his time in the Senate."
Cotton told MSNBC he will not accept any deal unless it includes "complete nuclear disarmament by Iran."
"They can simply disarm their nuclear weapons program, and allow complete, intrusive inspections," he said. Asked if he would support military action against Iran, Cotton said, "I think we have to have a credible threat of military force on the table."
He noted that Israel struck Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981 and Syria's nuclear reactor in 2007, and neither country has reconstituted their nuclear programs:
"Rogue regimes have a way of getting the picture when there's a credible threat of military force on the table that we will not allow the world's worst regimes to get the world's worst weapons. That's why it's important that we have the credible threat of force on the table that would only enhance the ability to get a better deal that leads to Iran dismantling its nuclear weapons program."
Seven Republicans, including Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, did not sign the letter to Iran's leaders. Corker reportedly feared turning the negotiation into a partisan issue.
But Cotton said he and Corker "agree on the ultimate goal, which is stopping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon." (The six other Republicans refusing to sign the letter are Lamar Alexander, Jeff Flake, Susan Collins, Dan Coats, Thad Cochran and Lisa Murkowski.)
At Monday's White House briefing, spokesman Josh Earnest described Cotton's letter as "the continuation of a partisan strategy to undermine the president's ability to conduct foreign policy and advance our national security interests around the globe."
Earnest said that in any potential deal, President Obama wouldn't just take Iran's word for it: "We're going to insist that the Iranians agree to intrusive inspection measures that will resolve the broader international community's concerns."
He also said the commitments Obama is seeking from Iran are no different from the "kind of commitments that we seek from other countries when we establish basing agreements with them."
For example, Earnest noted that the U.S. has basing agreements with the Japanese and South Korean governments that cover U.S. military personnel. "But that is not an agreement that's subjected to congressional approval." Nor was the agreement to eliminate Syria's chemical weapons program; nor were other nonproliferation agreements subject to congressional approval, Earnest said.
"I guess what I would say is that the kind of commitments that we are seeking to extract from the Iranians alongside our international partners is not one that falls in the realm of -- of requiring congressional approval on the front end."
Earnest said the Obama White House has "always envisioned a role for Congress at some point" in the Iran deal -- such as removing the sanctions once Iran has demonstrated compliance.
"And I think this is in some ways where the difference is," Earnest said. "Congress is insisting, well, that they should have a vote on the sanctions regime and on the deal shortly after an agreement is reached at the negotiating table. But that's not what the president envisions.
"The fact is, the president does not envision substantial sanctions relief for Iran right at the negotiating table; we want to see a demonstrated commitment on Iran's part to living up to the agreement before we contemplate offering relief from the statutory sanctions regime that Congress has put in place.
"And I'm not just talking about over the course of weeks or months; I'm talking about years. We would want to see Iran demonstrate its commitment to this agreement for years before we would envision a scenario where Congress would take away the sanctions that were so important to getting Iran to the negotiating table in the first place.
"So there is a robust and important role for Congress to play. There has been in the past, there is right now, and there will be in the future. But what Congress should not do, and frankly, what Republicans in Congress should not do, is continue to pursue a partisan strategy to undermine the talks before a deal has even been reached."
Anything that Obama fumes about is a step in the right direction for America.
President Cotton acting from the Senate. We need more executive action from Congress to challenge Zer0’s legislative actions.
for Iran, the letter makes no difference what ever.
at the root, there are no negotiations. There are men sitting around a table accomplishing nothing because the Iranians will never really give up anything of substance
Is that a sign of some cojones being grown by Republicans?
(Excellent!)
IMHO
They need to FOCUS on saving the United States. On the global stage,they need to prioritize disintegrating ISIS (which should've happened last summer). How about sending a letter to Mexico that the US Senate will defend our territory against the incursions Mexico encourages and enable?
Libya acknowleged a strong message sent to them regarding nukes too.
Our young warriors. Bravo!
U.S./Obama foreign policy is the greatest quagmire in the history of the republic.
Yep, who would be motivated by a Bammy set deadline?
On purpose....
Joe Biden slammed Cotton and the 46 other Republicans for trying to undermine a sitting president in the midst of sensitive negotiations. Biden called it beneath the dignity of the Senate.
ROTFLOL.....
Listening to the interview of the Egypt guy last night and hearing the commentary made me wonder as they did, why is this asshat negotiating with a nation that despises us while at the same time ignoring those that are friendly to us or at least say and do things that promote our values. The answer is simple, Oasshat has more in concert with the Muslim Brotherhood and their ilk than he has with any of the moderates and frankly anyone who stands against them like the Kurds. Remember that off hand comment to Stephenopolis during the first election: “my islamic faith” quickly corrected by the moderator to Christian. This guy is a hateful anti american values pro Muzzie. A lot of his subtle commentary like parrots words from an emir. The guy is the true Manchurian candidate except the future book will be titled the Muzzie candidate.
The more I hear and see Tom Cotton, the more I like him.
Obama represents the U.S. aristocracy, not the U.S. public. And so do almost all members of the U.S. Congress. .....democracy has ended in the United Sates...what we have is a dictatorship with a compliant congress who makes a good show but doesn’t deliver more than talking points.
There are enough Senators to be on the offensive both domestically and in foreign matters.
What Zero intends and what the Constitution requires have no correlation. The Constitution requires Congress to approve any and all treaties negotiated by the Executive branch. the Big O don’t need no approval. His word is final. He IS the state, in his own mind.
46??? I thought the GOP was the majority in the Senate!
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.