Leading Democrats have bundled
their push for a tough stance on Russia with escalation towards Iran.
Leading Democrats have
consistently pegged their anti-Trump “resistance” to a more confrontational
stance toward Russia—and bundled this demand with a push for greater escalation
against Iran. Now, the danger of this strategy is undeniable: These same
Democrats helped set the stage for Trump’s disastrous “withdrawal” on
Tuesday from the nuclear deal with Iran—and are playing a meaningful role in
pushing U.S. foreign policy to the right.
Under the 2015 Iran deal, the
United States ostensibly loosened sanctions in exchange for an agreement by
Iran to roll back its nuclear program (Iran did not have an active nuclear
weapons program).
Trump’s withdrawal puts the
United States and its allies on course for further military confrontation with
Iran and its allies—and forces ordinary Iranians to suffer the consequences of
devastating sanctions, including medicine shortages and food insecurity.
Every single Democrat in
Congress had a hand in creating the political climate
for Tuesday’s developments. Last summer, nearly the entire House and
Senate voted in favor of legislation that grouped together sanctions against
Russia, Iran and North Korea. The final version of the bipartisan legislation
materialized after sanctions against Russia were tacked onto an existing Iran bill in a measure introduced by Reps. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Steny
Hoyer (D-N.Y.) and Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.).
The only “no” votes on the
House version—H.R. 3364: Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions
Act—came from the isolationist and nativist Libertarian-leaning Republican
wing: Reps. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), John Duncan Jr. (R-Tenn.) and Thomas
Massie (R-Ky.). An anti-war front rooted in solidarity with the people of Iran,
Russia and North Korea was nowhere to be found. Even Rep. Barbara Lee
(D-Calif.), who built her name on her courageous stand against war in the
aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, voted for the bill.
Days later, on July 27, the
Senate passed the same bill in a 98-2 vote. Sen. Bernie
Sanders (I-Vt.) was the only lawmaker in Congress who caucuses with the
Democrats to issue a “no” vote. Democrats showed they were willing to risk
destroying the Iran agreement in an attempt to punish Moscow.
Obama’s former Secretary of
State John Kerry warned at the time that the new sanctions ran the risk of
upending the Iran deal. At a fundraiser in San Francisco last June, Kerry said,
“If we become super provocative in ways that show the Iranian people there has
been no advantage to this, that there is no gain, and our bellicosity is
pushing them into a corner, that’s dangerous and that could bring a very
different result.”
Democrats explicitly cited
Russia when supporting the bill. Sen. Dianne Feinstein told Intercept reporters
Alex Emmons and Ryan Grim last July: “I just looked at the sanctions, and
it’s very hard, in view of what we know just happened in this last election,
not to move ahead with [sanctions].”
At the time, Sanders was
harshly criticized for his “no” vote. Adam Parkhomenko, who served as a former
aide to Hillary Clinton and founded the Ready for Hillary PAC, said on
Twitter last July: “Feel the Bern? Bernie Sanders voted against Russian
sanctions today. 98 Senators voted for Russian sanctions today. Sanders voted
the same way anyone with the last name Trump would vote if they were in the
Senate. No excuses ― stop making them for him.”
With near unanimous support
from Congress, Trump signed the sanctions bill into law in August.
After Trump announced on
Tuesday that the United States would pull out from the Iran deal, the same
leading Democrats who voted for sanctions in 2017 immediately criticized his
decision. Pelosi called it a “sad day” and ranking Senate Foreign Relations
Committee member Sen. Bob Menendez—who authored the sanctions bill—called
withdrawal a “huge mistake.” Sen. Dick Durbin took Menendez’ assessment one
step further, declaring it a “mistake of historic proportions.” Even Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer—who voted to
block the Iran deal—said there wasn’t any reason for the United States to
violate the agreement. “There are no reports that Iran has violated the
agreement,” Schumer told reporters.
Schumer is correct about Iran
not violating the agreement, but—according to Iran—the United States had
already effectively violated it last summer when Schumer and the vast majority
of congress voted for the new sanctions. “In our view the nuclear deal has
been violated and we will show an appropriate and proportional reaction to this
issue,” Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in an interview after
the sanctions passed.
While most Democrats claim
they support the Iran deal despite their reckless pro-sanctions votes, Schumer
is among the four Senate Democrats who voted in favor of a
Republican-backed bill that would have blocked the deal, along with Joe Manchin
(D-W.V.), Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Bob Menendez (D-N.J.). In the House, 25
Democrats opposed the agreement in 2015.
“I have looked into my own
soul and my devotion to principle may once again lead me to an unpopular
course, but if Iran is to acquire a nuclear bomb, it will not have my name on
it,” said Sen.
Menendez at the time. “It is for these reasons that I will vote to
disapprove the agreement and, if called upon, would vote to override a veto.”
Now, Democrats who voted for
sanctions—or outright opposed the Iran deal—are loudly condemning Trump for
withdrawing from the accord. Missing from this discussion is a sober assessment
of how Democrats’ push for sanctions and escalation—emboldened by the myopic
focus on Russiagate—undermined the Iran deal and created political momentum for
Trump’s disastrous decision. Regardless of what one thinks about the motives
and scope of Russian influence operations—or their leverage over the Trump
administration—the net effect of Democrats’ overwhelming focus on Russia for
two years is undeniable: an increase of tensions with Russia and, by extension,
its biggest strategic ally in the Middle East—Iran.
There is reason to be concerned that,
by killing the deal, the Trump administration is paving the way for military
conflict with Iran. Shortly after the president’s press conference on Tuesday,
National Security Adviser John Bolton told reporters that such speculation was
a mistake.
However just last year, Bolton told members of the militant Iranian-exile cult
the MEK that they will overthrow Iran’s government and celebrate in
Tehran “before
2019.”
If this push for war grows
louder, it’s hard to envision Democrats doing much resisting.
No comments:
Post a Comment