Committee ranking member Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) and chairman Senator Robert Menendez (Democrat, New Jersey) listen during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Capitol Hill on September 3, 2013 in Washington. (BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images)[/caption]
The ‘Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act of 2013’ could pave the way to war. The 52-page Senate bill, if passed, will force Iran to retaliate by withdrawing from future negotiations with the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany), and by halting the implementation of the preliminary agreement on Iran’s nuclear program that Iran and the P5+1 signed in November. Even worse, Iranian hardliners—who have been opposed to President Hassan Rouhani’s nuclear concessions from day one—would once again gain the upper hand in the domestic debate on Iran’s nuclear program. They will seek to return to the nuclear policies of the era of former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which had the support of the country’s most powerful man, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The proposed Senate bill, put forward by US Senators Robert Menendez and Mark Kirk, is described by its drafters as an “insurance policy” if Iran fails to comply with its obligations and violates the terms of the agreement reached last November in Geneva. Supporters of the Menendez-Kirk Iran bill argue that it would be unwise to reduce the pressure on Iran while there is uncertainty regarding its willingness to comply fully with the demands of the international community. They are wrong.
The United States and its allies are not lifting the sanctions on Iran, nor are they rewarding Iran for bad behavior. Iran has agreed to reduce its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, close some of its controversial nuclear facilities, and allow International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors to examine its nuclear program. In return, the US has agreed, in the first phase of the agreement, to release a portion of frozen Iranian assets—worth about 4.2 billion US dollars—without rescinding any major sanctions. The Iranian oil and trade embargoes remain in force and will not be lifted until the international community is confident that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons.
Last month, the Iranian parliament threatened to pass legislation requiring the Iranian government to begin enriching uranium up to the level of 60 percent should the US impose new sanctions on Iran in the midst of negotiations. Though this is still too low for what is usually used in nuclear weapons, Iran has not previously gone above the level of 20 percent, making this a serious escalation.
Since public negotiations began after Rouhani came to office last summer, the hardliners in the Iranian parliament, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Khamenei have strongly expressed their deep mistrust of the West and the US. Khamenei has openly said that the US remains the “enemy of the Iranian people.” While he has implicitly supported the nuclear negotiations, he has positioned himself in a position of plausible deniability, so that in the event that negotiations fail he won’t lose face with hardliners.
Universal and comprehensive sanctions worked—they brought Iran back to the negotiating table. Supporters of the Menendez-Kirk bill need not worry—sanctions are not going anywhere until Iran fully addresses the concerns of the international community, and if the talks fail, they will have their opportunity to further increase pressure on the regime in Tehran. But setting up the stage for failure, which the bill’s passage would almost certainly guarantee, will endanger the small but significant gains the Obama administration has made.
All views expressed in this blog post are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, The Majalla magazine.
