Though I’m but an armchair pundit on international issues, I think that it’s standard fair that trying to negotiate with side which believes lying, cheating and dissembling to advance their cause, is always going to end up a failure. You dictate terms to them, you don’t negotiate with them.
Republicans Warn Iran — and Obama — That Deal Won’t Last
Josh Rogin
Mar 8, 2015 10:07 PM EDT
By Josh Rogin
A group of 47 Republican senators has written an open letter to Iran’s leaders warning them that any nuclear deal they sign with President Barack Obama’s administration won’t last after Obama leaves office.
Organized by freshman Senator Tom Cotton and signed by the chamber’s entire party leadership as well as potential 2016 presidential contenders Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, the letter is meant not just to discourage the Iranian regime from signing a deal but also to pressure the White House into giving Congress some authority over the process.
“It has come to our attention while observing your nuclear negotiations with our government that you may not fully understand our constitutional system … Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement,” the senators wrote. “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.”
Arms-control advocates and supporters of the negotiations argue that the next president and the next Congress will have a hard time changing or canceling any Iran deal — — which is reportedly near done — especially if it is working reasonably well.
Many inside the Republican caucus, however, hope that by pointing out the long-term fragility of a deal with no congressional approval — something Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has also noted — the Iranian regime might be convinced to think twice. “Iran’s ayatollahs need to know before agreeing to any nuclear deal that … any unilateral executive agreement is one they accept at their own peril,” Cotton told me.
Rogin’s article also gestures toward one of Washington’s worst-kept secrets, which is that the Obama administration is actively working to tie the hands of the next President to prevent a rollback. Administration supporters are confident they can get this done. The response from critics is that tying down the next president won’t work if Obama wants to retain the option to snap back sanctions over the course of the deal: if he can snap back sanctions, so can they.
In any case, most of the likely scenarios for a collapse assume that it will be Iran suspending the deal at a time of their choosing, i.e. the North Korea model. In addition to what the Senate letter sketched, there are any number of scenarios floating around – domestic and international – for why Iranian behavior means a deal won’t outlive the Obama administration. Some of the more prominent ones:
(1) Iranian terror sponsorship and regional expansionism – Due to the nature of the regime the Iranians will inevitably do something – sponsor an overseas terror attack, get too close to the border of a US ally, etc – that will bring them into a confrontation with Washington. Scenario: Iran forces a confrontation, then points to the U.S. reaction to back out of the deal (‘the American aggression violates the terms of the accord’).
(2) Iranian illicit finance – Iranian illicit finance, including terrorist financing, poses a grave threat to the stability of the integrity of the global financial order. A deal will deepen the crisis by flooding Iran with cast. Scenario: Iranian illicit finance threat becomes acute, the Treasury Dept is forced to respond, and Iran uses that as a pretext to suspend the deal (‘the Americans are reimposing sanctions’).
(3) Saudi proliferation – Saudi Arabia is set proliferate even in the absence of Iranian cheating, in anticipation of the sunset clause putting Iran on the glide path to a nuclear weapon. Scenario: Iran points to Saudi proliferation to back out of the deal (‘we can’t be expected to sit on our hands while our enemies act’).
(4) Internal Iranian politics – The current Supreme Leader will soon die and the IRGC is widely expected to play kingmaker in choosing his successor. Scenario: an even more hardline regime takes over in the context of a stabilized Iranian economy and abrogates the deal.
(5) Iranian cheating – No one serious believes that the Iranians have suspended their covert nuclear program (an administration official mocked the idea to the NYT a while back – saying it would be the first time in 15 years if it happened – and even the State Dept talks about distrusting Tehran). Scenario: the Iranians cheat and a future President is unwilling to look the other way.
