Kerry, top Democratic senator spar on Iran deal, sanctions

[webfact]

Kerry, top Democratic senator spar on Iran deal, sanctions
By BRADLEY KLAPPER and DEB RIECHMANN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry sparred Tuesday with the lone Democratic senator to publicly oppose last month's historic Iran nuclear deal, saying there was no way the U.S. could prevent American allies from doing business with Tehran if Congress were to reject the agreement.

Speaking across town in New York, Sen. Chuck Schumer disagreed and suggested Washington still could force the world into isolating the Iranians until they make deeper nuclear concessions.

The dispute goes to the heart of the questions that American lawmakers are considering as they prepare to vote on the nuclear accord.

If they were to shelve the deal — and override an expected presidential veto — they could severely complicate the Obama administration's ability to honor its commitments to roll back economic sanctions on Iran. In exchange, Iran has agreed to a decade of tough restrictions on Iran's nuclear program and a far more intrusive inspections regime.

Republicans are almost universally opposed at this point.

Addressing a Reuters Newsmaker event in New York, Kerry took aim at those in Congress who say a better deal could still be reached. That argument would entail the U.S. maintaining or increasing pressure on Iran by threatening foreign governments and businesses for trading with Tehran or buying Iranian oil, a strategy that both President Barack Obama and Republicans credit with drawing Iran into serious nuclear negotiations two years ago.

Now that the pact has been finalized, Kerry said such a heavy-handed approach was an option no longer.

"Are you kidding me?" he asked the crowd. "The United States is going to start sanctioning our allies and their banks and their businesses because we walked away from a deal? And we're going to force them to do what we want them to do, even though they agreed to the deal we came to?"

Kerry warned of severe consequences for pursuing such an approach after the agreement has been accepted by Iran and fellow negotiating countries Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia — and endorsed by all 15 members of the U.N. Security Council.

He said that European governments could walk away from the U.S.-led sanctions strategy against Russia, that the United States and Israel would have no support for military action against Iran, if such action were necessary, and that the U.S. dollar would lose its status as the reserve currency of the world.

The top American diplomat also challenged those who have criticized the length of the deal's restrictions on Iranian enrichment of material that can be used in nuclear warheads and other elements of its program.

He suggested it was illegitimate to worry that Iran would be a "nuclear threshold nation" in 15 years or 20 years, because it already is one today. "They became that while we had a policy of no enrichment," he said, referencing the continued demand of Republicans and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

If Congress were to vote down the deal, he said, the U.S. would lose the moral high ground.

"We will have left Iran free to go do its program, without restraints, without inspections, without knocking down its stockpile, without knowing what they're doing," he said.

Echoing Kerry's case, 36 retired generals and admirals released an open letter on Tuesday urging Congress to back the deal.

"Military action would be less effective than the deal, assuming it is fully implemented," the letter said. "If the Iranians cheat, our advanced technology, intelligence and the inspections will reveal it, and U.S. military options remain on the table. And if the deal is rejected by America, the Iranians could have a nuclear weapon within a year. The choice is that stark."

Kerry's comments came shortly after Schumer told reporters why he decided last week to oppose the agreement.

Even if the U.S. were to back away and other countries lifted their sanctions, he contended that "powerful" secondary sanctions would prevent many foreign governments from doing business with Iran and force them into new negotiations with Iran. He cited the French oil company Total as one that would suffer if it dealt with Iran, because then it would be locked out from the U.S. market.

"We have that powerful tool, and if used, I think that's a better, better chance in a very difficult world than an agreement that is so totally flawed," Schumer said.

Schumer is in line to be the Democrats' next leader in the Senate and his defection was seen as a significant blow to Obama's effort to sell the Iran deal to Congress. Since then, however, a handful of Senate Democrats and several House Democrats have announced their support.

Schumer was asked by reporters if he would lobby colleagues to vote with him.

"Certainly, I'm going to try to persuade my colleagues that my viewpoint is right, but anyone who thinks you can force somebody to vote with you in the Senate doesn't understand the Senate," he said. "This is a vote of conscience. It was a vote of conscience for me. It will be a vote of conscience for my colleagues."
___

Associated Press writer David B. Caruso in New York contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-08-12

[ezzra]

Not many people knows it but Kerry son in law is a Iranian- American who took his new bride

to visit his homeland and family right after the wedding ceremony...

dose that make him partial and biased toward going easy on the Iranians? quite possibly....

[geriatrickid]

On the positive side, the disagreement here is a good sign.

Why?

Because it shows that democracy and freedom of speech and thought is alive and well in the USA.

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed.

[EnglishJohn]

Kerry has failed to impress me from the first time I heard him speak and he has only gone downhill from there. I wonder how he has kept this job.

The key problem with this agreement is the notice which must be given before any facility can be inspected. It is very obvious that the Iranians plan to carry on their work. This deal will give Iran at least THREE MONTHS notice of any inspection (if they delay it using the terms of the agreement). Which makes it virtually worthless - and remember Iran will now have much more cash available.

And if they can't move the equipment, they will simply not honour it. What will the USA do then ?.

The only argument I have heard in favour of this agreement is that the alternative is war. And the only other time I know of when people were told the same thing was the Munich agreement in 1938.

If we have only learned one thing from all these problems in the Middle East it should be that you can not trust a single word they say.

[ZeldasCavern]

The sad truth is this administration, Iran, and interested multinational parties have deceived, strategically calculated, and boxed the Republican Party & key US Allies into this current no win position, stating no other logical option.

Except for war of course.

[Steely Dan]

He said that European governments could walk away from the U.S.-led sanctions strategy against Russia, that the United States and Israel would have no support for military action against Iran, if such action were necessary, and that the U.S. dollar would lose its status as the reserve currency of the world.

So Kerry is running out of things to scaremonger with so he now pulls the loss of the dollar as the world's reserve currency out of his rectum. Shame neither he nor his master engaged in similar fire and brimstone style warnings to Iran when negotiating the deal in the first place.

P.s here is a list of threats so far.

1. War

2. Everyone blames Israel

3. Everyone blames Congress.

4. Congress will be compared to Iranian hardliners.

5. Sanctions regime will collapse (one wonders how anyone can threaten this yet promise sanctions will magically snap back into place if Iran doesn't abide by an agreement).

6. Jewish members of congress voting against the deal will be considered Israel firsters.

7.loss of the position of the dollar being the world reserve currency.

Looks like he missed out plague of frogs and Armageddon.

P.S Obama has his own Iranian connections as well as Kerry.

[Steely Dan]

Not many people knows it but Kerry son in law is a Iranian- American who took his new bride

to visit his homeland and family right after the wedding ceremony...

dose that make him partial and biased toward going easy on the Iranians? quite possibly....

This all makes perfect sense in light of what has come to pass.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/259756/obama-offered-recognize-ahmadinejads-iran-nuclear-daniel-greenfield#.VcoL540Emtc.twitter

Hossein Sheikh Al-Islam, an advisor to Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani, said that John Kerry had relayed a letter to Tehran recognizing Iran's enrichment rights: "We came to the [secret] negotiations [with the U.S.] after Kerry wrote a letter and sent it to us via Oman, stating that America officially recognizes Iran's rights regarding the [nuclear fuel] enrichment cycle."

This took place back in 2011!

Edited August 12, 2015 by Steely Dan

[Srikcir]

"Schumer ... suggested Washington still could force the world into isolating the Iranians until they make deeper nuclear concessions."

These negotiations could only occur because of the unity of the G-7 in establishing sanctions. Now with Iran's agreement to the Deal, they (China, Russia, France) are preparing for a full commercial engagement with Iran. If the US walks away from this deal through Republican legislative action, the US will stand alone in continuing its sanctions, some of which require cooperation of the G-6 nations.

There will be no "forcing" the G-6 much less the world into a more strict Deal.