Powered by WebAds

Friday, April 30, 2010

Obama administration too busy to enforce sanctions against Iran

Rick Richman provides some statistics about the enforcement of existing sanctions against Iran that were cited by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman at the conference committee on the currently pending Iran sanctions:
Then he gave a description of enforcement by the U.S. of prior sanctions legislation, indicating that it has had no effect whatsoever:

And let me address one more critical issue. In the years since the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act was first passed in 1996, there has been only one instance in which the President determined that a sanctionable investment had taken place. That was in 1998, and the purpose of President Clinton’s determination was to waive the sanction. Since then, there has never been a determination of sanctionable activity, notwithstanding the fact that recent GAO and CRS reports – and, for a time, even the Department of Energy website – have cited at least two dozen investments in Iran’s energy sector of sanctionable levels.
Berman argues that the pending bill needs to require the President to investigate all reasonable reports of sanctionable activity, determine whether the reported activity is sanctionable, and, “if it is, to go ahead and either impose sanctions or, if he chooses, waive sanctions.” But Berman knows that the Obama administration opposes even that:
I know the Administration officials don’t want our bill to require the Executive Branch to investigate each report of sanctionable activity. They especially don’t want the bill to require them to make the determination as to whether or not to actually impose sanctions. They want to be authorized to impose sanctions, if they so choose, but they don’t want to be required to impose them. They cite a number of legitimate reasons for their position: workload concerns, constitutional concerns, and foreign policy concerns.
Workload concerns.
Since the enforcement problem dates back to 1996, George W. Bush can share in the blame for the current state of affairs. And when Iran goes nuclear, he can just blame Bush. That ought to make Obama happy.


At 5:26 AM, Blogger NormanF said...

And Netanyahu has pledged not to attack Iran until it has the bomb.

What could go wrong indeed

At 4:28 PM, Blogger NormanF said...

Just before Shabbat for a change - Caroline Glick presents the latest Latma edition. How Barack Obama really feels about Israel in his heart and how the Israeli media truly protects the public's right to know when it comes to scandals at the top of the Israeli government.

Barack Obama Visits Latma With A Song In His Heart


At 7:15 PM, Blogger Captain.H said...

"Since the enforcement problem dates back to 1996, George W. Bush can share in the blame for the current state of affairs." OR

Since the enforcement problem dates back to 1996, the ultimate blame is at Bill Clinton's feet.

Clinton failed to deal with the problem when it was far smaller and the danger far less, leaving it to grow and fester.

This is yet another example on the lengthy list showing how disastrous the Clinton Administration was. Anyone wanting to read on that subject could start with the illuminating book "Dereliction of Duty: The Eyewitness Account of How Bill Clinton Compromised America's National Security" written a number of years ago by retd. Col. Robert Patterson,who served directly under Clinton for several years.


Post a Comment

<< Home