GOP tries to undercut nuclear deal with warning to Iran
By BRADLEY KLAPPER and DEB RIECHMANN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican lawmakers warned the leaders of Iran on Monday that any nuclear deal they cut with President Barack Obama could expire the day he leaves office. The White House denounced the GOP's latest effort to undercut the international negotiations as a "rush to war."

Monday's open letter from 47 GOP senators marked an unusually public and aggressive attempt to undermine Obama and five world powers as negotiators try to strike an initial deal by the end of March to limit Iran's nuclear programs.

Republicans say a deal would be insufficient and unenforceable, and they have made a series of proposals to undercut or block it — from requiring Senate say-so on any agreement to ordering new penalty sanctions against Iran or even making a pre-emptive declaration of war.

Obama, noting that some in Iran also want no part of any deal, said "I think it's somewhat ironic that some members of Congress want to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran. It's an unusual coalition."

The letter was written by freshman Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who opposes negotiations with Iran. It's addressed to the "Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran" and presents itself as a constitutional primer to the government of an American adversary. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky's signature is on it, as are those of several prospective presidential candidates.

Explaining the difference between a Senate-ratified treaty and a mere agreement between Obama and Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the senators warned: "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."

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif responded via state media, dismissing the letter as a "propaganda ploy" and noting that many international deals are "mere executive agreements." He suggested the senators were undermining not only the prospective deal with Iran but other international agreements as well.

With Cotton presiding over the Senate on Monday, Democratic leader Harry Reid spoke out, saying Republicans were driven by animosity toward Obama and unwilling to recognize that American voters had twice elected him president.

"Let's be very clear: Republicans are undermining our commander-in-chief while empowering the ayatollahs," Reid said.

"Republicans don't know how to do anything other than juvenile political attacks against the president," the 75-year-old Reid said with the 37-year-old Cotton listening.

The Republicans' move to stop a nuclear deal with Iran comes just days after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to a joint meeting of Congress at Republican House Speaker John Boehner's invitation. In his address, Netanyahu bluntly warned the United States that a deal would pave Iran's path to a nuclear bomb.

The White House denounced Cotton's letter, saying it was part of an ongoing partisan strategy to undermine the president's ability to conduct foreign policy.

Press secretary Josh Earnest said that "the rush to war, or at least the rush to the military option, that many Republicans are advocating is not at all in the best interest of the United States."

Not all Republican senators are united. One significant signature missing from Monday's letter was Bob Corker of Tennessee, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman. Action on any new legislation challenging the administration's strategy would be likely to begin with him.

Still, even if all parties to the international talks reject the letter as a stunt, the mounting opposition to an accord could have repercussions. Negotiating alongside the U.S. are Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia.

The Obama administration believes it has authority to lift most trade, oil and financial sanctions that would be pertinent to the nuclear deal in exchange for an Iranian promise to limit its nuclear programs. For the rest, it needs Congress' approval. And lawmakers could approve new Iran sanctions to complicate matters.

Nuclear negotiations resume next week in Switzerland. Officials say the parties have been speaking about a multi-step agreement that would freeze Iran's uranium enrichment program for at least a decade before gradually lifting restrictions. Sanctions relief would similarly be phased in.

Iran says its program is solely for peaceful energy and medical research purposes. The deadline for the whole agreement is July.

In the letter, Cotton and his colleagues stressed that presidents may serve only eight years while senators can remain in office for decades. The implication was that without Congress' blessing, the deal could fall apart when Obama's successor is sworn in in January 2017.

The deal taking shape is not a treaty. Under international law, the provisions of treaties are far more binding than other agreements.

But by themselves, congressional Republicans won't be able to block an international agreement.

McConnell has spoken of action later this month authorizing Congress to take a yes-or-no vote on a deal. But that vote would be symbolic.
___

Associated Press writers Alan Fram, Steve Peoples and Jim Kuhnhenn in Washington and Cara Anna at the United Nations contributed to this report.

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-03-10

U.S. Senate reiterates that there are laws in the United States some of which Obama must obey. Putting him on a leash is not a bad idea. prior to him giving away the store

There's a new caucus grouping in the Senate, the Republican-Likud-Iran Revolutionary Guard Caucus.

Expect the commander of the Iran Revolutionary Guard to be appearing in Congress soon alongside Speaker Boehner to address a joint session.

Hey, if the Republican party wants to politically shoot itself in the head, who would I be to try to stop it. I certainly can't influence or control the Republican party in the Senate. All I can do is to watch the hits and to party as the hits just keep on coming.

This is the best news for the Democratic party since Joe McCarthy, Spiro Agnew, John Dean.

" ....to ordering new penalty sanctions against Iran or even making a pre-emptive declaration of war."

With a little luck, the US electorate might come to their senses and vote out these hawks who are looking to go to war at the behest of Israel's lies.

It's an absolutely ridiculous situation where the Republicans can offer to put US bodies on the line and throw US taxpayer funds at another war, all for Netanyahu, who has done and will never do anything for America except tell lies and gobble up more funds.

Well, that's a misleading title to the story. They wrote a letter. Need a better editor here.

So we can expect War with Iran when the Republicans take office . More scaremongering and WMD nonsense to look forward to

Well, that's a misleading title to the story. They wrote a letter. Need a better editor here.

Are you suggesting that it's inaccurate?

From the OP:

Republican lawmakers warned the leaders of Iran on Monday that any nuclear deal they cut with President Barack Obama could expire the day he leaves office.

I think the leaders of Iran would like that....they would probably be highly motivated about that.

However and to the contrary, I'd expect the ayatollahs might know more about American government and politics than the Republicans in the Senate give 'em credit for, because they seem to be planning and preparing for a woman in the White House who this time will be the commander in chief.

President Ballbricker.

Iran doesn't need nuclear programs what so ever, they posses some of the biggest oil and gas

reserves in the world, if they need a nuclear program for peaceful purposes why than they

enrich tens of thousand of centrifuges and in many locations, many well fortified and under

ground....

Iran can't be trusted as it is openly a main supporter, provider and enabler of many terrorists

groups and rouge countries around the world, it has embarked on power and hegemony

seeking crusade many years ago, seeking to dominate in control what ever it can even tough

it has no business doing so,

Iran is a cunning, immoral country that will sacrifices all for power, like it did in the 10 years

Iraq-Iran war that claimed millions of casualties, a water of the duck back for them...

By Iran obtaining nuclear capabilities, it will open the race for the other Sunni countries like

Saudi Arabia that already is talking to Pakistan presumably to get a leg up on getting some

of their nuclear weapons, and this is only the begging...

Anything the GOP can do to stymied the Iranians from getting full nuclear capabilities

or even near to it, it will be not a moment too soon,,,,

There's a new caucus grouping in the Senate, the Republican-Likud-Iran Revolutionary Guard Caucus.

Expect the commander of the Iran Revolutionary Guard to be appearing in Congress soon alongside Speaker Boehner to address a joint session.

Hey, if the Republican party wants to politically shoot itself in the head, who would I be to try to stop it. I certainly can't influence or control the Republican party in the Senate. All I can do is to watch the hits and to party as the hits just keep on coming.

This is the best news for the Democratic party since Joe McCarthy, Spiro Agnew, John Dean.

You...like other liberal Dems...are wishful thinking and full of...yourself...

The foreign minister of Iran has not only dismissed the 47 Republican warmonger senators, but he has taken them to school about the US Constitution to include multilateral agreements, which is what the one being negotiated would be.

The FM advised the Senate Republicans that the sought for agreement between the P5+1 and Iran would be, well, a multilateral agreement between the P5+1 and Iran.

It is not a bilateral agreement between only the United States and Iran.

So anyway, does the 47 include Senator Bibi?

Iranian FM calls Republican letter to Iran 'propaganda ploy'

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, speaking to Iranian press, mocked a letter sent by 47 Senate Republicans to Tehran warning of their intent to undermine any future multilateral agreement – as a "propaganda ploy" and questioned whether its signatories – including the upper chamber's most senior members – fully understood their constitutional role.

"In our view, the letter has no legal value," Zarif said. "While no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the respect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history."

"The world is not the United States, and the conduct of interstate relations is governed by international law – not domestic law," he continued. "The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states and are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs."

http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Iranian-FM-calls-Republican-letter-to-Iran-propaganda-ploy-393404

Well, that's a misleading title to the story. They wrote a letter. Need a better editor here.

Are you suggesting that it's inaccurate?

Yes. There is no "undercutting" going on.

"future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time."

Note to Republican Senators:

If a Republican controlled congress decides to modify the terms of the multi-national agreement, It must be with a presidential veto-proof law! Currently, the Senate cannot even get enough Senate Democrats to pass a law, much less to get a veto override.

Another Note to Republican Senators:

If Iranian leadership feels any negotiated agreement with the P-6 is subsequently modified without its consent, it can also chose to modify or ignore the terms of any modified agreement.

Republicans, as does Netanyahu, act as if Iran must behave as a conquered nation who must offer unconditional surrender of its sovereignty to nuclear energy which is guaranteed under the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons agreement. Iran will not conceed its sovereignty that easily, nor will Russia and China support such an arrogant US attitude.

Well, that's a misleading title to the story. They wrote a letter. Need a better editor here.

Are you suggesting that it's inaccurate?

Yes. There is no "undercutting" going on.

Garbage.

^^ If it weren't so serious it would be laughable.

15 years ago Bush was getting ready to come into the White House - why did he not prevent NK from building nukes?

Answer -

Because he couldn't.

Just the same way as no President will prevent Iran from building nukes.

Wake up.

We have deployable weapons that can penetrate 50 feet of cement . If you walk among terrine, don't be afraid to swing the bat. Kick ass and take Names. Strike when their weak not when they build up Nukes to us against us!

^^ If it weren't so serious it would be laughable.

15 years ago Bush was getting ready to come into the White House - why did he not prevent NK from building nukes?

Answer -

Because he couldn't.

Just the same way as no President will prevent Iran from building nukes.

Wake up.

We have deployable weapons that can penetrate 50 feet of cement . If you walk among terrine, don't be afraid to swing the bat. Kick ass and take Names. Strike when their weak not when they build up Nukes to us against us!

^^ If it weren't so serious it would be laughable.

15 years ago Bush was getting ready to come into the White House - why did he not prevent NK from building nukes?

Answer -

Because he couldn't.

Just the same way as no President will prevent Iran from building nukes.

Wake up.

Okay - so its war again.

Its been a while since that worked out well for the US, hasn't it?

Of course they tried to undercut the deal. Peace just isn't profitable, damn it. Worse, they have to nip this peace crap in the bud or the public will be asking for stupid stuff like new schools and more efficient ways to lower the cost of living.

It's good to give a clear shot across the bows to Obama as well as the Iranian regime. I think it's worth remembering the Iranian embassy hostages were released the day Carter left office, I suspect any centrifuges left spinning would be stopped the day Obama leaves too.

It is quite simple as long as Israel has nuclear weapons Iran will keep on trying to make them and I don't blame them.

First and utmost task especially for the US is to force Israel and the jewish council in New york to get rid of the damn things. I am sure Iran will be quite willing to talk.

Israel is just a very small country in this world and we cannot allow them to dictate a deadly threat to all of us in the rest of the world.

And the republicans should stop dancing to the songs of the jewish council, whether they own the banks or not, and the democrats should take a harsh stand here too.

We are sick and tired of warmongers dictating us and putting our lives in danger.

We vote for leaders not for wars.

I don't trust Obama to get a good deal with Iran.

I don't trust the republicans are acting in the best interests of the U.S. either messing with Obama.

But I really, really, really do not trust Iran.

They are heading towards nukes weapons.

Who is going to stop them?

Anyone?

" ....to ordering new penalty sanctions against Iran or even making a pre-emptive declaration of war."

With a little luck, the US electorate might come to their senses and vote out these hawks who are looking to go to war at the behest of Israel's lies.

It's an absolutely ridiculous situation where the Republicans can offer to put US bodies on the line and throw US taxpayer funds at another war, all for Netanyahu, who has done and will never do anything for America except tell lies and gobble up more funds.

It is quite simple as long as Israel has nuclear weapons Iran will keep on trying to make them and I don't blame them.

First and utmost task especially for the US is to force Israel and the jewish council in New york to get rid of the damn things. I am sure Iran will be quite willing to talk.

Israel is just a very small country in this world and we cannot allow them to dictate a deadly threat to all of us in the rest of the world.

And the republicans should stop dancing to the songs of the jewish council, whether they own the banks or not, and the democrats should take a harsh stand here too.

We are sick and tired of warmongers dictating us and putting our lives in danger.

We vote for leaders not for wars.

Iran wants nukes regardless of whether Israel has them or not and Iran would get nukes whether Israel had them or not.

North Korea developed nukes despite the fact and reality no nation in that region that they consider an adversary has nukes, not South Korea, not Japan, not Taiwan, not Mongolia -- not a one. Nor does North Korea have nukes to challenge either Russia or China or both.

North Korea has nukes because the United States exists. Iran will get nukes because the United States exists. Iran will get nukes because it wants membership of the exclusive yet dubious club of nuclear armed nations.

That Israel has nukes is a greater incentive, however, Iran wants nukes because it can have them and because the United States exists.

Israel having nukes is small potatoes to Iran but Iran knows small potatoes can be hot ones too, which says despite any Iranian declarations against Israel notwithstanding, Iran knows that "wiping out Israel" or whatever translations one likes means Iran disappears too.

As far as the United States is concerned, Iran would be a greater direct threat to the 28 countries of Nato than it would be to Israel. Rest assured the United States is looking out for Number One in this. So is every political party and every Israeli in Israel. The White House and Netanyahu have a deadly serious difference in this respect.

U.S. Senate reiterates that there are laws in the United States some of which Obama must obey. Putting him on a leash is not a bad idea. prior to him giving away the store

The leash needs to be on the animals of the Republican Congressmen. They are nuts!!! I think their actions border on Treason. What a bunch of racist!!

But I really, really, really do not trust Iran.

They are heading towards nukes weapons.

Who is going to stop them?

Anyone?

That would be the same folks that should have stopped Israel's acquisition of Nukes

aka: nobody as it is nobody's business what goes on within a country that has not directly attacked anyone.

Especially not the business of some dogs of war that like to complain for decades over the same ....all the while committing war crimes

themselves.

This yapping backstabbing GOP is really losing favor quickly.

Someone should also mention to them they should have

"should we be so fortunate to have any supporters left by the time Obama leaves office"

added to their letter

While I am a supporter of neither side this GOP recently has left a terrible taste that will not be easy to lose

But I really, really, really do not trust Iran.

They are heading towards nukes weapons.

Who is going to stop them?

Anyone?

That would be the same folks that should have stopped Israel's acquisition of Nukes

aka: nobody as it is nobody's business what goes on within a country that has not directly attacked anyone.

Especially not the business of some dogs of war that like to complain for decades over the same ....all the while committing war crimes

themselves.

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

"future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time."

Note to Republican Senators:

If a Republican controlled congress decides to modify the terms of the multi-national agreement, It must be with a presidential veto-proof law! Currently, the Senate cannot even get enough Senate Democrats to pass a law, much less to get a veto override.

Another Note to Republican Senators:

If Iranian leadership feels any negotiated agreement with the P-6 is subsequently modified without its consent, it can also chose to modify or ignore the terms of any modified agreement.

Republicans, as does Netanyahu, act as if Iran must behave as a conquered nation who must offer unconditional surrender of its sovereignty to nuclear energy which is guaranteed under the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons agreement. Iran will not conceed its sovereignty that easily, nor will Russia and China support such an arrogant US attitude.

A ten-year extensive inspections regime within the limits of Iranian sovereignty would strike a good balance for the P5+1, to include of course the United States. If the six major global powers can agree on this approach, and get Iran to accept it, only the crank governments would be displeased, or grouchy about it. All indications are that a deal will be agreed around the time of the June 30th target date set by the P5+1, perhaps a little after.

Seven Republican senators did not sign the love letter pledge of loyalty to the ayatollahs in Tehran, the most prominent being Sen Bob Corker of Tennessee, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. Sen Corker is widely considered to be a thoughtful and reasonably balanced eastern US Republican in contrast to a lot of the cowboy Republican senators who ride the prairies of the Western US with abandon, from Texas to Idaho to Montana.

Sen Jeff Flake of Arizona who is a member of the Foreign Relations committee is opposed to additional sanctions as long as negotiations are occurring and progress is being made.

Sen Flake noted that Prez Obama is pursuing a multilateral agreement, not a treaty, which means it does not need Senate approval, but that some Congressional input would be wise. "I just think it was inappropriate," Sen Flake said of the letter, which was signed by his Arizona colleague Sen John Bombs Away McCain.

Other Republican senators not signing the letter are: Susan Collins of Maine, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Dan Coats of Indiana, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

So the point of the post is well taken, which is that Republicans in the Senate can't get the needed 60 votes to pass a common ordinary bill, much less the 67 votes needed to override a veto by Prez Obama of anything they do manage to do. Senate rules require a broad consensus to do anything and that is good because Republicans can't agree among themselves.

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

Yes I do

I should add the obvious...

I prefer none have them but if folks like Israel has them in that region then

100% yes Iran should also have them.

U.S. Senate reiterates that there are laws in the United States some of which Obama must obey. Putting him on a leash is not a bad idea. prior to him giving away the store[/quote. ] All of these republican tea party jerks should be charged with treason who votes for these people they have a brain the size of a pea ,I have never seen so much disrespect for a president of the United Ststes of America.Nick