Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Bridget Johnson

Bio

November 16, 2013 - 9:14 am

The chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said she’ll oppose congressional calls for tougher sanctions against Iran on the risk that it could rankle the Islamic Republic’s feelings during negotiations.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have grown increasingly nervous about the prospect of the Obama administration rushing a deal on Iran’s nuclear program. Reuters quoted a senior U.S. official today as saying, “I don’t know if we will reach an agreement. I think it is quite possible that we can, but there are still tough issues to negotiate.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she’ll “strongly oppose any attempt to increase sanctions against Iran while P5+1 negotiations are ongoing.”

“The purpose of sanctions was to bring Iran to the negotiating table, and they have succeeded in doing so. Tacking new sanctions onto the defense authorization bill or any other legislation would not lead to a better deal. It would lead to no deal at all,” Feinstein said Friday.

“I am baffled by the insistence of some senators to undermine the P5+1 talks. I will continue to support these negotiations and oppose any new sanctions as long as we are making progress toward a genuine solution.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said “no one who is serious about preventing a nuclear-armed Iran should be comforted” by the almost-deal that happened last weekend in Geneva.

Rumblings after that meeting said it was France that was actually holding the line against giving in to Iran. Tellingly, French President Francois Hollande is flying to Israel on Sunday — his first visit as president — for talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Yesterday, Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) wrote President Obama with their concerns about the “significant sanctions relief” on the table — a value of up to $20 billion.

“Iran would not be required to dismantle a single centrifuge, close a single facility or ship outside its borders a single kilogram of enriched uranium. Furthermore, the accord would allow Iran to continue working on a plutonium reactor, enriching uranium, manufacturing centrifuges, testing ballistic missiles, sponsoring terrorism and abusing the rights of its people. In short, the American people will facilitate the payment of $20 billion in hard currency to the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and in return accept a more advanced and dangerous Iranian nuclear infrastructure,” the letter emphasized.

The senators laid out their concerns, not limited to:

The Arak Heavy Water Reactor. How can an agreement allow Iran to continue any work on its Arak heavy water reactor – work that is strictly prohibited by multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions? Once operational, this reactor could produce enough plutonium for two nuclear weapons each year, giving Iran a second path to a nuclear weapon. Due to construction delays, the Arak reactor is currently not scheduled to come online until the middle of next year – meaning Iran is not making any concession whatsoever by agreeing not to activate the reactor in the next six months. In short, accepting work on the Arak heavy water reactor during the next six months will in no way slow Iran’s path to plutonium production.

The Enrichment of Uranium. No agreement should cede to Iran the right to enrich uranium nor allow Iran to continue enrichment at any level – Iran must suspend enrichment as required by United Nations Security Council resolutions. Based on Iran’s current rate of production, 9,000 IR-1 centrifuges would produce 1,380kg of 3.5% enriched uranium over a six-month period – roughly the amount needed to produce one nuclear weapon. Iran is also reportedly demanding that the United States and our partners acknowledge its right to enrich under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a “right” that Administration officials previously testified to Congress does not exist. In short, if allowed to continue enrichment at low levels during the next six months, Iran will have another bomb’s worth of enriched uranium and will claim implicit recognition of a “right to enrich.”

The Centrifuges. No agreement should allow Iran to maintain its current number of installed centrifuges, nor should any agreement allow Iran to continue the manufacturing of centrifuges. If Iran is allowed to keep all of its installed centrifuges and simply promise not to use them all – or not to install more – nothing will have been done to shrink Iran’s nuclear breakout capability. According to the Institute for Science and International Security, thousands of currently installed centrifuges must be disabled or removed to set back Iran’s breakout timeline. Furthermore, without requiring Iran to declare its manufacturing facilities and allow international inspections at those sites, Iran could manufacture 3,000 new centrifuges over a six-month period – and have them ready to install in a matter of weeks. In short, if Iran is permitted to keep its installed centrifuges and manufacture more for the next six months, Iran will improve its nuclear breakout capability.

The Money Transfer. Under the proposal reportedly discussed in Geneva, the United States would waive or suspend sanctions on precious metals (valued at $9.6 billion over six months), petrochemicals (valued at $5-6 billion over six months) and the automotive sector (valued at more than $1 billion over six months) – and repatriate $3 billion in overseas-held funds back to Iran. But without any third-party monitoring or financial controls, these funds may be used to finance terrorism, develop ballistic missiles or brutalize the Iranian people. In short, this proposal hands over $20 billion in hard currency to the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism.

Cooperation with the IAEA. Despite Iran’s supposed agreement on November 11, 2013 to provide greater transparency about its nuclear activities to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), after years of engagement, Iran continues to refuse to provide key answers regarding its past work on the weaponization of a nuclear device as well as provide access to facilities and individuals involved in that work. This is not a side issue to be relegated purely to discussions between Iran and the IAEA. In short, this issue goes to the heart of Iran’s history of deception and must be part of any serious negotiation.

They reminded Obama that “once our sanctions pressure is forfeited, the chances for diplomacy to succeed will diminish.”

“Rather than forfeiting our diplomatic leverage, we should increase it by intensifying sanctions until Iran suspends its nuclear and ballistic missile programs in accordance with multiple Security Council resolutions,” the senators continued. “We intend to work with our colleagues to continue to increase pressure on Iran until they comply with all of their international obligations and abandon any effort to retain enrichment and reprocessing capabilities.”

On the House side, the conservative Republican Study Committee encouraged the administration to increase sanctions on Iran.

“Israel is our strongest ally and most trusted friend in the region, and before taking any action, President Obama would do well to consult with Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has called any waiving of sanctions ‘very, very bad’ and ‘the deal of the century’ for Iran,” RSC Chairman Steve Scalise (R-La.) said. “It is time for the Senate to join with us in standing strong against a nuclear armed Iran by taking up the bill passed by the House to increase sanctions.”

The House passed H.R. 850, a bill to increase sanctions on Iran, at the end of July by an overwhelming vote of 400-20.

Bridget Johnson is a career journalist whose news articles and opinion columns have run in dozens of news outlets across the globe. Bridget first came to Washington to be online editor at The Hill, where she wrote The World from The Hill column on foreign policy. Previously she was an opinion writer and editorial board member at the Rocky Mountain News and nation/world news columnist at the Los Angeles Daily News. She has contributed to USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, Politico and more, and has myriad television and radio credits as a commentator. Bridget is Washington Editor for PJ Media.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (12)
All Comments   (12)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
my co-worker's mom makes $77 hourly on the laptop. She has been fired from work for 7 months but last month her pay check was $15344 just working on the laptop for a few hours. his explanation>>>>>>>>>>> www.jobs35.com
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
my neighbor's sister-in-law makes $60/hr on the computer. She has been laid off for six months but last month her payment was $16262 just working on the computer for a few hours. see here now>>>>>>>>> www.jobs35.com
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
Sen. Feinstein: "We have to stop being mean to the Mooslim Terrorists (er, Iranians) who are trying to develop nuclear weapons to kill us with.....if we keep being mean, they will not like us anymore" You know, in international politics, when the French are calling you a pu$$y....you must be a pu$$y. How embarrassing....

Remember BENGHAZI!
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
Narcissism is one thing. Insanity is another. If she is baffled by the desire of some senators to undermine the diplomatic talks I can spell out the reasons for her. The Iranian government is manned by very religious men. Their religion teaches them that they should try to conquer the world. The main enemy is Jews but Christians come close and Sunni Muslims not far behind. Basically any government that does not do things the Shia way should be smashed. This is their doctrine. They have been steadily pursuing the path ever since the Shah left Iran. Their religion allows them to dissemble and lie for the sake of the religion - ie to advance the day when all humans do things the Shia way. It is insane to pretend that Iran is not doing these things. The government of Iran repeats these doctrines to the people of Iran day in and day out, and puts the doctrines into practise. I am told that narcissists crave excitement, but it is insane to want excitement so much that you help the government of Iran acquire nuclear weapons. We have to impeach Obama and all his colleagues. We have to stop this madness. I do not know when it is going to be too late but one day it will be too late. We must act now.
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
No deal is better than any deal dummy. For a super sophisticated elite better, you sure are stupid when it comes to the always lying Iranian junta. Unless on the other hand, you want them to get the bomb so perhaps they can wipe a "sh.tty little country" off the map, eh?
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
As mayor and senator, she still undermines investigations.
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
Hey Lucy, would you hold this football for me? How many times has Iran "come to the table" only to walk away again with nothing settled? GO ISRAEL!!!!!
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
Greetings:

Wasn't it Senatress Feinstein who first said, "You can take my Senate seat when you pry it from my cold dead ass." ???
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
A very stupid way of thinking.
IF the sanctions indeed brought the mad mullahs to the table (but I am not sure they REALLY are at the table, ready to give away anything), this would be the moment to press them further and show to them that if they do not negotiate seriously their troubles will grow and grow.
But there is no Democrat ever available to make America stronger, they always support the options that cause America's power to disappear.

21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
Stupid old cow! There is not going to be any 'deal'. The only deal will be the one between Israel and Saudi Arabia if the USA ends up doing nothing - which seems to be the likeliest scenario. Israel will probably get the OK to fly over S.A. and gas up their jets on the return trip.

It is what the Saudis do best after all - hold your coat while you kick the local bully's ass.



21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
Looks like the French may offer some support as well....they partnered with Israel during the Suez Crisis and held up their end of the deal. We all like to make sport of the French re: WWII and the Vichy government, and their departure from Vietnam (Indochina). But, I have trained with modern French spec ops through NATO joint exercises and they are very capable...when they also possess the will. They have kicked some serious jihadi ass in North Africa recently.

Remember BENGHAZI!
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
I agree. Israel will attack. And the meeting with the French Leader will probably discuss the details of this...far from the NSA ears.
21 weeks ago
21 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All

One Trackback to “Feinstein ‘Strongly Opposes’ More Iran Sanctions on Chance ‘It Would Lead to No Deal at All’”