Breaking: Democratic Congressman to vote against Iran sellout
Representative Alcee Hastings (D-Fl) has become the latest Representative to announce that he will vote against
President Hussein Obama's sellout to a nuclear Iran.
The goal of the recently concluded
negotiations was to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. The
negotiators worked diligently, but in the end, the JCPOA allows Iran to
remain a nuclear threshold state while simultaneously reaping the
benefits of relief from international sanctions.
Let’s be clear: Iran is a nuclear threshold
state and it didn’t become one overnight. It happened over decades, as
Iran continuously asserted that its nuclear program was for civilian
purposes. Violating five UN resolutions, Iran has reduced its breakout
capacity to a matter of weeks. This is not the behavior of a trustworthy
partner in peace.
Under the JCPOA, Iran is limited to
approximately 6,100 centrifuges for a period of 10-15 years. However,
after this time passes, Iran will again have the ability to pursue its
nuclear program with more, advanced centrifuges. Iran simply needs to be
patient and it will once again have the ability to enrich uranium.
Just last month, the UN Security Council
endorsed the JCPOA. Among other things, the Security Council’s
resolution lifts the ban on conventional arms sales to Iran after five
years, and gives Iran the authority to restart its nuclear-capable
ballistic missile development program within eight years. This poses a
threat to the US and to our allies.
These provisions, coupled with a mere delay of
Iran’s nuclear program, will give other regional powers a clear window
of opportunity to strengthen or create their own weapons programs. As
conventional weapons shipments to Iran resume, its neighbors will feel
obligated to bolster their own security.
Billions of dollars will be injected into the
Iranian economy as sanctions are lifted. Some portion of this money is
likely to be directed toward state-sponsored terrorist groups, such as
the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Hezbollah, the Houthi, and Hamas.
We must maintain a strong sanctions regime –
to do otherwise is to give up our leverage. Sanctions are what brought
Iran to the table, and already, companies from around the world are
lining up to invest in Iran. Should sanctions need to be re-imposed, it
is not clear if investment contracts implemented in the meantime would
be voided. Indeed, many nations may no longer feel bound to US sanctions
once UN and EU-based sanctions are eased.
The provisions of the agreement that allow
sanctions to “snap back” are of particular concern. This process could
take well over two months and is limited to “significant” violations of
the deal (the JCPOA fails to define what qualifies as significant.) Iran
could undermine the agreement in ways that would be nearly impossible
Alarmingly, the agreement imposes a process
that can take up to twenty-four days before inspectors gain access to
any undeclared nuclear sites discovered in the future. This delay could
provide Iran with substantial opportunity to hide any missile or nuclear
My vote against this deal is not a vote for
war, nor is it a vote to do nothing. I believe the US should continue to
lead the way with our allies on sanctions until a truly comprehensive
deal is reached. Just because we got a deal doesn’t mean it’s the right
deal, and until we have a deal that permanently disassembles Iran’s
nuclear program, we should not enter into an agreement that undermines
our negotiating power in the future.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Iran Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, nuclear weapons