National Journal reported this evening on statements
emerging from the Senate regarding efforts by a bipartisan
group of Senators to introduce new legislation that would
impose sanctions on Iran should Tehran refuse, at the end of
an upcoming six month negotiation period, to commit to
sufficiently dismantling its atomic program so that it could
no longer be used for pursuing nuclear weapons. An
announcement on the proposed law is expected Thursday.
The Tower had earlier
today conveyed statements from Sen. Mark
Kirk (R-IL) expressing optimism regarding the prospects for
such legislation. Kirk
had specifically emphasized that he was cooperating closely
Sen. Bob
Menendez (D-NJ) on the proposed wording of a bill, and
National Journal quoted Menendez updating reporters and
officials on how the potential law was taking shape:
“I am working with a series of members, and I expect we’ll have some type of an announcement tomorrow,” Menendez said Wednesday. “The dynamics are what I’ve always said they would be, which is to give the president the space and time so that he can test the Iranians’ seriousness of purpose in terms of whether they are willing to strike an agreement, but to be ready should they ultimately fail.”
Reports indicate that
lawmakers are responding to several dynamics surrounding
stalled negotiations with Iran, many of which emerged clearly
only in recent days and have deepened skepticism regarding
Iranian intentions.
Under the terms of the
Joint Plan of Action hammered out weeks ago in Geneva, a six
month period was to take hold during which Iran would freeze
progress on its nuclear program and the U.S. would lift some
sanctions and refrain from imposing new nuclear-related
sanctions. Under
questioning from journalists, the State Department
acknowledged days after the deal’s announcement that in fact
the six month period had yet to begin, and that it wouldn’t
start until Iran agreed on how to implement the JPA. Iran recently broke off the
negotiations over the JPA’s implementation, and Agence
France-Presse recently assessed that there was no end in sight for those talks. It had in the meantime Iran has continued to enrich
uranium, pledged to bolster its
plutonium production plant, and announced that it would
test ballistic missiles.
The White House has
nonetheless been heavily lobbying lawmakers to avoid imposing
pressure on Iran during the so-called interim before the
interim. Sources
who spoke to National Journal implied that the Senate has had
enough, and that ‘Iran’s temporary break-off in negotiations
with world powers in Vienna last week has reinforced
lawmakers’ doubts about Iran’s commitment.’ The bill is said to include options for a
Presidential waiver, provided that the administration is able
to certify that Iran is meeting its JPA obligations and
negotiating in good faith in the context of a final agreement.
The Senate legislation
will reportedly stake out positions both on the interim
agreement and on what a final deal will need to include to
satisfy US lawmakers.During the interim period, new sanctions
would be imposed if Tehran violated the terms of the JPA,
tested medium or long-range ballistic missiles which could
eventually be used to deliver nuclear weapons, or was
implicated in terror attacks against the United States
anywhere in the world. Regarding
a final deal, the legislation reportedly outlines tough
sanctions should Iran refuse to substantially degrade its
uranium and plutonium programs, both of which are widely
thought to be involved in a drive for nuclear weapons. Senators
will demand that Tehran meet the terms of the half-dozen
binding United Nations Security Council resolutions demanding
that it fully suspend those and other elements of its nuclear
program.
Lawmakers more broadly
have emphasized that the threat of future pressure will
strengthen the administration’s hand in upcoming negotiations. Top
Iranian officialshave boasted that concessions
granted under the JPA – which the White House insists are
“limited, temporary, targeted, and reversible” – are actually
extensive enough to “collapse” the sanctions regime. Analysts
have expressed concerns that the Iranian boasts are justified,
and have cited a range of reasons from administration
under-counting of
how much the relief is worth to a potential feeding
frenzy which
would see nations and companies rush back into the Iranian
market.
Senators are also said to
be responding to among other things a convergence of
polling showing
that as many as eight out of every ten Americans support
lawmakers in maintaining or increasing sanctions on Iran as a
comprehensive agreement is negotiated.
Meanwhile Iran has sought to frame any
legislation threatening new sanctions after the JPA’s six-month
window – i.e. of the kind likely to be considered by the
Senate – as a violation of the U.S.’s commitment to refrain
from imposing sanctions within the JPA
six-month window. Tehran
and those echoing its position have leaned heavily on
asserting that such laws violate the “spirit” of the interim
agreement.
Robert Satloff, executive
director of the Washington Institute, tonight described the framing
efforts as “unconnected to reality.” Satloff went on to imply that it
was somewhat churlish to accuse the U.S. of violating the
“spirit of Geneva” even as Iranian scientists continued to
conduct activities which are at a minimum in severe tension
with the agreement. The
Tower assessed earlier this week that “tt is not clear why the
Iranians believed that gestures toward the spirit of the JPA
would have diplomatic of public purchase, inasmuch as Tehran
has in recent weeks committed to enriching uranium, bolstering
its plutonium production complex, and testing ballistic
missiles – all actions which it insists are permitted under
the letter of the JPA.”
No comments:
Post a Comment