Iran Negotiations: Myth versus Fact [+videos]

In recent weeks the Obama Administration’s attempts at reaching a nuclear deal with Iran have suffered repeated setbacks both at the negotiating table and in the court of public opinion. As a result, the storm of talking points and promises from both the White House and Congress would have the average citizen believing that the Administration’s efforts to court the Ayatollah have been thus far successful, all the while enjoying the full support of Congress and the American people. In reality the current negotiations and the congressional oversight framework for any possible deal with Tehran are proving more and more indecisive and potentially destabilizing than thought possible.

Here’s how the actual situation looks.

Myth: The Corker-Cardin Bill grants adequate constitutional approval to Congress.

Fact: Even though a deal with Iran would be tantamount to a treaty, the approval process contained in the bill compromise effectively lowers the threshold of approval from 67 to 34, in the case of President Obama’s veto. By passing this bill, Republicans will be openly legitimizing his Iran deal without formal ratification, a reversal of their stated position in the “Cotton Letter.”

Myth: The current bill language would provide congressional oversight on Iran’s terror activities.

Fact: Even though Iran has been a recognized sponsor of international terrorism since 1984, the new version of the Corker-Cardin bill scuttled the previous language requiring the Obama Administration to certify to congress that Iran is not sponsoring or committing terror activities against the United States or her citizens. By stripping out this language and allowing Iran to receive $700 million in assets per month while ramping up their support for Hamas and Hezbollah they are implicitly blessing Iran’s war on Israel.

Myth: The current deal with Iran would require a scaling back of Iran’s nuclear efforts.

Fact: No reactors or centrifuges would have to be dismantled. Despite several Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying that the current negotiations would lead to a reversal of Iranian nuclear activities, all current operations would continue at facilities in Natanz, Fordow, Isfahan and Arak, while enjoying the economic boon of having sanctions lifted.

Myth: Iran would have to surrender their stockpiles of enriched uranium in a transparent and secure manner.

Fact: Even though a major selling point of recent agreements would be Iran’s surrendering of enriched uranium, the surrendered materiel would be handed over to Russia, the biggest supplier of Iran’s nuclear program. This would be analogous to North Korea being forced to surrender its ballistic missiles to the People’s Republic of China. Meanwhile, there is no recognition in the deal of Iran’s longstanding clandestine program, the real threat. Besides, Iran has already rejected any weapons inspections on their “military” installations.

Myth: The Obama Administration’s current deal would protect and affirm the status of Israel as a legitimate Jewish state with a right to exist.

Fact: The compromise only contains non-binding language expressing “the sense of the Senate” that any agreement “in no way compromises the commitment of the United States to Israel’s security, nor its support for Israel’s right to exist.” This was changed from an earlier condition requiring Iran to recognize Israel’s right to exist, and exist as a Jewish state. While the language sounds good in spirit, it effectively does little to protect Israel’s security, as there is no binding language requiring terror certification or stopping the manufacture of rockets to be given to organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran is stepping up their arming of those terror groups while benefiting from the relief in sanctions pending a final deal.

Myth: Iran would have to scale down its manufacture and testing of nuclear weapons.

Fact: There is no mention whatsoever in the proposed framework that would affect Iran’s continued development of inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and Tehran has even continued to test them throughout the negotiations. Rather, with the economic burden of the sanctions lifted, the Iranian government would have even more fungible assets to develop and test ICBMs. Even more troubling should be the implications of this development. While a ballistic missile may be a really impressive piece of hardware to show off at a parade, it’s essentially little more than a rocket-propelled paperweight unless tipped with some sort of hardware, usually nuclear.

Myth: Although the Corker-Cardin bill is weak, it is still better than nothing.

Fact: Corker-Cardin is not a weak bill, it’s a harmful bill. It implicitly blesses Obama’s negotiations even after both the White House and the Iranians have violated all of the stated objectives and timetables. It explicitly legitimizes ratification of the deal with just 34 votes, providing Republicans with no recourse to block it later on and little leverage to delegitimize the final agreement if they fail to muster enough votes to strike down the agreement.

Republicans have the ability to pass sanctions or vote to disapprove of the deal any time. They don’t need to provide Democrats cover in order to utilize their control of the chamber. This bill does not give them any power they wouldn’t otherwise have held. The majority party doesn’t need the permission of the minority party to conduct a vote, especially when the minority party is still committed to filibustering it. Instead of this bill being a bunt or a base-hit, it’s a groundball into a triple play.

Indeed, just days after this Corker-Cardin deal was forged, Obama used his newfound flexibility to telegraph the message that he is open to lifting sanctions immediately.

Myth: At least this puts Democrats on record as supporting scrutiny of the Iran Deal.

Fact: A dozen Democrats were already on record over a year ago supporting a straight up sanctions bill. After Republicans let them off the hook a number of times, these Democrats finally agreed to vote for sanctions if Iran failed to accede to a framework agreement on March 24. Iran has rejected every tenant of the alleged framework, yet Democrats have not only moved away from sanctions, they watered down a simple congressional oversight bill. Now, instead of Republicans holding them accountable, they are agreeing to a more liberal position than these dozen Democrats held just a year ago.

So while the popular narrative may be that the Obama Administration has finally brought Iran to the negotiating table for a definitive agreement, it seems that both the administration’s efforts, as well as the desire of Senate Democrats to laud them, will do very little, if anything, to secure a more stable and safe nuclear situation for the United States, Israel and the world as a whole. (See “Iran Negotiations: Myth versus Fact [+videos]”, originally posted HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.