Friday, September 11, 2015
Opponents of the Iran nuclear deal failed to secure (NYT) the Senate votes needed for a disapproval resolution on Thursday, making it almost certain that the agreement will go into effect without the use of a presidential veto. The House of Representatives is slated to vote (WaPo) on procedural motions on Friday. The agreement is slated to be formally adopted in October, ninety days after it was endorsed by the UN Security Council. Earlier this week, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khameini said the country would not hold further negotiations (VOA) with the United States beyond nuclear issues. Meanwhile, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif is scheduled to visit (Reuters) Beijing next week to discuss the Iran nuclear agreement and boost ties with China.
"But since Iran negotiated on rather than gave up its nuclear program, it demonstrated to major powers that it would not be bullied with military threats and economic sanctions, Zarif and like-minded advocates of the deal argue. The two-year-long nuclear negotiations undermined Iranophobia in many foreign capitals as major powers learned they can—and, indeed, must—resolve their differences with Iran via diplomatic channels rather than by coercion," writes Farideh Farhi in this CFR Expert Roundup.
"Through much of its existence, Iran’s nuclear program was an illicit one, subject to sanctions and sabotage. The threat of military attack hovered over the program, threatening its progress if not existence. The fact is that Iran required time to develop a state-of-the-art infrastructure and dispose of its antiquated devices. A deal that legalizes the program, shields it from retribution and grants it a reliable procurement channel for obtaining technologies from abroad is what Iran needed to construct an industrial nuclear network. Before the JCPOA, Iran was the custodian of an embryonic nuclear program that nearly all of the Western intelligence services were seeking to derail. All that is now gone," writes CFR's Ray Takeyh in Politico.
"We did not reach the nuclear deal in the expectation that Iran’s external policy would change any time soon. But it does address the threat from Iran’s nuclear program and may open the way to recognition by Iran that collaboration with its neighbors is better than confrontation: Although we may not have the same interests as Iran, we do face some common challenges, including the threat from ISIL. We are confident that the agreement provides the foundation for resolving the conflict on Iran’s nuclear program permanently," write David Cameron, Francois Hollande, and Angela Merkel in the Washington Post.
Posted by Barbara at 6:49 AM