March, 29 2019, 12:00am EDT
Reentry to the Iran Nuclear Deal Emerging as Consensus Position
Following the Trump administration's disastrous decision to reimpose nuclear-related sanctions on Iran, 2020 contenders, former policymakers, and experts have all urged a return to U.S. compliance with the landmark nonproliferation accord. This growing consensus highlights the dangers of the Trump administration's approach and the need to restore U.S. diplomatic credibility by returning to compliance with the 2015 bargain.
WASHINGTON
Following the Trump administration's disastrous decision to reimpose nuclear-related sanctions on Iran, 2020 contenders, former policymakers, and experts have all urged a return to U.S. compliance with the landmark nonproliferation accord. This growing consensus highlights the dangers of the Trump administration's approach and the need to restore U.S. diplomatic credibility by returning to compliance with the 2015 bargain.
In November, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) published a key report making the case for reentry, entitled "Restoring U.S. Credibility: Returning to the Iran Nuclear Agreement."
Below, please see selected support for this important position:
Major 2020 Contenders
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA): "If Iran maintains itself in compliance, then I believe the President should reverse his reckless decision to withdraw from the nuclear deal and reimpose sanctions because the deal makes America safer and the world safer."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT): "A Sanders aide said that "as president, Sen. Sanders would rejoin the JCPOA and would also be prepared to talk to Iran on a range of other issues, which is what Trump should've done instead of simply walking away. Rejoining the JCPOA would mean meeting the United States' commitments under the agreement, and that includes sanctions relief.""
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-MA). Harris "would rejoin the Iran deal if the US could verify Iran is not cheating and is complying with the strict requirements detailed in the agreement," said a spokesman for the senator. "She believes we must engage in tough, forceful diplomacy to combat Iran's destabilizing behavior in the region," her spokesman said.
Julian Castro: "The Iran Nuclear Agreement was a landmark achievement that prevented a nuclear-armed Iran for more than 3 years. If Iran continues to comply with the terms of the agreement as determined by the intelligence community, I will re-enter the U.S. into the #JCPOA as President."
Democratic National Committee Resolution
DNC: "[r]eturning to the JCPOA will restore America's commitment to an agreement made with allies and prevent a renewed nuclear crisis in the Middle East."
Current and Former U.S. Officials
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT): "We need to get back into the Iran nuclear agreement and we need to do it fast...The fact of the matter is Europe has been trying desperately to keep Iran in the deal by continuing to keep open economic channels between European countries and Iran. But Iran is only going to hold to the deal for so long. At some point, if the United States violated the terms, Iran is going to violate the terms...if we don't get back into that agreement, that at some point Iran will restart their nuclear weapons program."
Mara Karlin and Tamara Cofman Wittes, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development and former deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs: "The United States should return to the agreement and continue efforts to roll back Iran's bad behavior both alone and with partners."
Ned Price, former Special Assistant to President Obama for National Security Affairs: "[T]he new Democratic House now has the oversight tools to spotlight and constrain the administration's recklessness, just as we begin to clear the path for the next administration's reentry into the deal. There may be tactical disagreements regarding how to most effectively confront Iran's destabilizing regional activities, but there must be a strategic recognition that only the JCPOA provides a baseline that allows us to achieve our most important objective: a nuclear weapons-free Iran."
Lawrence Wilkerson, Col, USA (Ret), former chief of staff to secretary of state Colin Powell: "[W]ithout a resumption of our agreed responsibilities under the JCPOA, alliances will fracture, de-dollarization movements will proceed apace, enemies will gain ground, and Iran will not be substantially prevented from acquiring a nuclear weapon. War could even result. The wonder is that the U.S. withdrew from the agreement in the first place; even more of a marvel-but entirely wise and proper-would be a successful return. Every concerned party should be working toward that end."
Over 50 retired generals and ambassadors: "Subsequent to the United States' withdrawal from the deal, Iran's continued compliance is not ensured and the benefits from the agreement risk being lost. Reentering the Iran nuclear deal advances the United States' national interests by ensuring these benefits persist and enables us to work more closely with our European allies... Re-entry into the nuclear deal will contribute to establishing a broader U.S. national strategy for the Middle East... Reaffirming leadership in this area will improve the ability of the U.S. to develop and lead a multilateral effort to contain the Iranian threat."
Organizations
Over 50 pro-diplomacy groups: "Pro-diplomacy groups representing millions of American voters urge lawmakers to publicly articulate and support the following principles with respect to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that verifiably blocks each of Iran's pathways to a nuclear weapon and created a much-needed diplomatic relationship between Iran, the United States, and U.S. allies: Support for the JCPOA and returning the United States to compliance with the agreement...Support for good faith diplomacy toward additional agreements as the preferred basis for addressing further concerns about Iranian activity."
International Crisis Group: "As the 2020 election season gets underway, Democratic candidates could affirm their intent to rejoin the JCPOA as long as Iran abides by its own obligations. Doing so would send a message to the Iranian leadership that sticking to their nuclear commitments is indeed the wiser approach."
Experts
Robert Malley, President of the International Crisis Group: "I think the better way forward is to rejoin the nuclear deal, that's a subject for maybe the next administration, and to use that model - without any illusions, without any naivete about how quickly relations are going to change - but understanding that Iran does have a place in the region that people are going to have to take into account....Once we have the nuclear deal reestablished, the next topic is to try to understand how you could have a security architecture in which Saudi Arabia, the Gulf's, Iran's, other interests can be accommodated."
Ellie Geranmayeh, Deputy Head MENA program at The European Council on Foreign Relations: "President Trump's decision to withdraw the US from the JCPOA, after months of negotiations with European allies earlier this year on pathways to sustain the agreement, was significantly damaging for transatlantic ties. This wound has been deepened by the manner in which the White House has sidelined European security interests and tried to impede their efforts to preserve the JCPOA, as enshrined by a UN Security Council. This report highlights the urgent need for the US executive and legislative branch to reassure European allies that in matters of foreign policy, the United States is a credible and consistent partner. Moreover, the US should reassure European capitals and companies that US sanctions policy will not seek to illegitimately target allies in pursuit of a maximalist policy that is unlikely to trigger fundamental changes in Iranian behaviour."
Hooman Majd, Iranian-American writer: "It almost goes without saying that the best option for de-escalating tensions in the Middle East, and preventing nuclear proliferation, is for the U.S. to return to the JCPOA nuclear accord. It is unimaginable that Iran would agree to a new deal--or indeed any other deal on other issues of contention--without the U.S. first abiding by the commitments that it made when it signed on, along with five other powers, to the nuclear deal with Iran."
Barbara Slavin, Director of the Future of Iran Initiative at The Atlantic Council: "An obvious first step is to return the US to compliance with the JCPOA in a package of executive orders that also reverses other counterproductive decisions, such as the "Muslim" ban, which disproportionately hurts Iranians and Iranian-Americans. For the longer term, however, the US should seek early negotiations with Iran and P5+1 partners on a JCPOA 2.0 that establishes a firmer foundation for non-proliferation and conflict resolution in the Middle East."
Narges Bajoghli, Assistant Professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies: "It is crucial for America's standing in the world that we work to re-enter the JCPOA in the near future. This report provides concrete steps that Congress can take now to ensure that we return to the promises we made to the international community. Without doing so, America will continue to act as a force of instability in the Middle East."
Farideh Farhi, Independent Scholar and Affiliate Graduate Faculty at the University of Hawai'i at Manoa: "The Trump Administration's ill-conceived rejection of the JCPOA and policy of 'maximum pressure' can no doubt inflict pain on the Iranian people. It can also court disaster in risking Iran's resumption of its nuclear activities, further destabilization of the Middle East, and possibly even another costly US war in the region. Remaining quiet in the face of these predictable harms is not an option. This report offers timely and reasonable recommendations for keeping the JCPOA alive as a pathway for the re-emergence of a saner approach to Iran."
Bijan Khajehpour, economist and a managing partner at Eurasian Nexus Partners: "The US rejoining the JCPOA and helping to sustain a multilateral agreement will not only reduce the likelihood of an unnecessary nuclear arms race in the Middle East, but also prevent a radicalisation of Iranian politics. A moderate Iran is important for regional stability, the containment of jihadist movements and the future energy security for US allies globally."
Nicholas Miller, Assistant Professor of Government at Dartmouth College: "The JCPOA has successfully curtailed Iran's nuclear program and remains the surest tool for preventing an Iranian bomb. The new Congress should do what it can to limit the serious damage done by the Trump administration's withdrawal from the deal. If the administration's 'maximum pressure' campaign continues to escalate, the odds increase that Iran will exit the agreement and move closer to a nuclear weapon, which could in turn spark a costly war."
Paul Pillar, Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University: "Candidates and legislators of all political persuasions would do well to read and heed this report. The Trump administration's abandonment of arms control and diplomacy in favor of conflict and confrontation has brought the United States only isolation and infamy as well as heightened risk of war. It is not too late to return to compliance with the JCPOA and to a course that demonstrably serves U.S. interests better than the current policy does."
NIAC Action is the grassroots, civic action organization committed to advancing peace and championing the priorities of the Iranian-American community. We are a nonpartisan nonprofit and the 501(c)4 sister organization of the National Iranian American Council, which works to strengthen the Iranian-American community and promote greater understanding between the American and Iranian people.
LATEST NEWS
X Suspends Journalist Ken Klippenstein Over Publication of JD Vance Dossier
"The 'free speech absolutist' has once again silenced a journalist he didn't like," said one observer.
Sep 26, 2024
X—the social media platform formerly known as Twitter—suspended Ken Klippenstein's account Thursday after the investigative journalist posted an article containing a link to a dossier on Republican U.S. vice presidential candidate JD Vance that allegedly came from an Iranian hack of former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign.
Klippenstein, who formerly worked at The Intercept, said on his paid Substack Thursday that his X account was suspended for violating the platform's ban on posting private information.
"I know that it is general practice to delete 'private' information from leaks and classified documents, but in this case, not only is Vance an elected official and vice presidential candidate, but the information is readily available for anyone to buy," he wrote. Vance is also the junior U.S. senator from Ohio.
Klippenstein continued:
We should be honest about so-called private information contained in the dossier and "private" information in general. It is readily available to anyone who can buy it. The campaign purchased this information from commercial information brokers. Those dealers make huge profits from selling this data. And the media knows it, because they buy the data for reporting purposes, just like the campaign. They don't like to mention that though.
According to Klippenstein, the corporate media has "been sitting on" the dossier since June, "declining to publish in fear of finding itself at odds with the government's campaign against 'foreign malign influence.'"
"If the document had been hacked by some 'Anonymous'-like hacker group, the news media would be all over it," he contended. "I'm just not a believer of the news media as an arm of the government, doing its work combatting foreign influence. Nor should it be a gatekeeper of what the public should know."
Klippenstein shared a general overview of the contents of the dossier, which he described as "a 271-page research paper the Trump campaign prepared to vet" Vance, pulling out select quotes from the document:
- "Vance has been one of the chief obstructionists to U.S. efforts to providing [sic] assistance to Ukraine."
- "Vance criticized public health experts and elected officials for supporting Black Lives Matter protests while condemning anti-lockdown [Covid] protests."
- "Vance 'embraced non-interventionism."
- "In 2020, Vance criticized President Trump's airstrike killing Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, worrying it would continue to bog down America in the Middle East to the advantage of China."
- "Vance suggested that the country had been entangled in wars in the Middle East so 'financial elites' could profit from the rise of China."
"While the news media has paraphrased some of the contents of the dossier, what they haven't done is provide the American people with the underlying document, in the language in which it appeared, so they can decide for themselves what they think," Klippenstein said. "You decide for yourself."
An X spokesperson toldZeteo's Justin Baragona that "Ken Klippenstein was temporarily suspended for violating our rules on posting unredacted private personal information, specifically Sen. Vance's physical addresses and the majority of his Social Security number."
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is investigating the Trump campaign's claim of an Iranian hack. Iran's government denies any such action.
Numerous observers accused Musk—a self-described "free speech absolutist"—of hypocrisy over X's suspension of Klippenstein's account, although it is not known if the billionaire owner had any role in the decision. Other users also reported punitive action against their accounts over the dossier post.
"I'm old enough to remember when free speech zealot Elon Musk was outraged by Twitter's censorship," journalist Seth Hettena said on X.
Jacobin writer Branko Marcetic posted that "this scenario is actually a good preview of the future none of us want, but that we're heading to currently: A major story breaks, establishment press refuses to cover it, and the indy media that does is throttled by tech censors."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Helene's Catastrophic Potential Stokes Fear Amid Florida Insurance Crisis
Florida already has one of the nation's largest shares of homeowners "who don't have meaningful insurance."
Sep 26, 2024
Hurricane Helene continued barreling toward Florida on Thursday, highlighting the impacts of the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, including difficulties securing insurance coverage in regions most affected by extreme weather.
"The Air Force Hurricane Hunters found that the maximum sustained winds have increased to near 120 mph," the National Hurricane Center said Thursday afternoon. "This makes Helene a dangerous Category 3 major hurricane. Additional strengthening is expected before Helene makes landfall in the Florida Big Bend this evening."
Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Deanne Criswell said during a White House briefing that forecasts suggest Helene will make a "dead-on hit to Tallahassee" and "this is going to be a multistate event with the potential for significant impacts from Florida all the way to Tennessee."
Although this Atlantic hurricane season hasn't yet been as intense as U.S. scientists expected, trends in extreme weather disasters have led some insurance companies to exit the Florida market in recent years. Farmers Insurance announced last year that it would stop covering property in the state, in an effort to "effectively manage risk exposure."
While the Insurance Information Institute, an industry trade group, said in May that "legislative reforms passed in 2022 and 2023 have created a pathway to a stable Florida market," reporting from this week shows that residents—who aren't ultrarich—are still struggling to get and keep coverage.
"Florida ranks sixth among states with the largest shares of homeowners who don't have meaningful insurance. About 18% of homeowners across the state—about 1 in 6—are without it," NBC Newsnoted Wednesday. "Nearly 20% of Florida homeowners pay $4,000 or more a year for homeowners insurance—the largest share in the country, according to the Census Bureau."
According toThe Palm Beach Post, the global reinsurance broker Gallagher Re said in a Wednesday analysis that "landfall in the Big Bend or Panhandle region of Florida as a major hurricane (Category 3, 4, or 5) has historically translated to insured losses in the low single-digit billions."
"But Helene is not a typical storm," the firm explained. "Given Helene's very large wind radius, this would still bring hurricane-force wind gusts and high storm surge to coastal areas in the heavily populated Tampa Bay area, tropical storm force winds across most of the Florida peninsula, Georgia, the Carolinas, Tennessee, and southern Appalachia."
Gallagher Re suggested that "Helene's private insurance market losses should be expected to land in the range" of $3 billion to $6 billion, but if the hurricane "unexpectedly" moves toward Tampa, it could be over $10 billion.
Florida isn't the only state facing insurance trouble thanks to climate chaos. Voxreported last year that "insuring property in California has been a dicey proposition," pointing to torrential rainfall that "caused as much as $1.5 billion in insured losses" and "the costliest wildfires in U.S. history, including the 2018 Camp Fire, which led to more than $10 billion in losses."
Amid the intertwined climate and insurance crises, scientists, campaigners, and homeowners have demanded policy action—and elevated criticism of right-wing attacks on crucial programs.
In a June blog post, Rachel Cleetus, policy director with the Union of Concerned Scientists' Climate and Energy program, wrote that "Congress and regulators need to ensure more transparency in the insurance market on how companies are evaluating risks as they make decisions about premiums. There also needs to be better information on what kinds of incentives companies are providing for adaptation measures that would help reduce risks."
"Alongside the necessary but ultimately bounded role of insurance in a warming world, public and private decision-makers must also shift investments away from business-as-usual maladaptive and risky choices to more resilient ones," Cleetus continued. "The nation must scale up resources for climate resilience and ensure they are reaching communities in a just and equitable way. Funding for safe, affordable, and climate-resilient housing must be expanded."
The Climate & Community Institute on Wednesday also shared recommendations in a new report—Shared Fates: A Housing Resilience Policy Vision for the Home Insurance Crisis—using case studies from California, Florida, and Minnesota.
"We propose the creation of Housing Resilience Agencies (HRAs), either by states or the federal government," the institute said. These agencies would:
- Provide public disaster insurance that offers fair and equitable protections;
- Coordinate and oversee comprehensive, community-oriented disaster risk reduction;
- Address existing market failures by providing coverage for oft-neglected sectors such as multifamily housing providers, mobile home dwellers, and heirs properties; and
- Host public risk models, climate risk advisory councils, and diverse governing boards to inform decision-making in a transparent and democratic manner.
"In order to confront the growing housing safety and affordability crisis, we need to understand our fates as shared," the institute added. "We must reimagine our home insurance system for it to reduce risk and provide equitable and fair protection."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Giuliani Permanently Disbarred in DC Over Effort to Overturn 2020 Election
"Imagine once being dubbed 'America's Mayor' and having an illustrious legal and political career, and throwing it all away for Donald Trump," said one observer.
Sep 26, 2024
Former Republican New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani can no longer practice law in the nation's capital after a federal appeals court on Thursday concurred with a disciplinary committee's recommendation for permanent disbarment over his efforts to "undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election" in service of then-President Donald Trump's "Big Lie."
In a one-page ruling, the Washington, D.C. Court of Appeals permanently revoked Giuliani's law license, finding that the former federal prosecutor and personal attorney for Trump failed to explain why he should not be subject to reciprocal punishment after the New York Supreme Court's Appellate Division disbarred him in July for lying about the 2020 election.
The New York tribunal found that Giuliani "repeatedly and intentionally made false statements, some of which were perjurious, to the federal court, state lawmakers, the public... and this court concerning the 2020 presidential election, in which he baselessly attacked and undermined the integrity of this country's electoral process."
Giuliani is also facing criminal charges related to alleged election subversion in Arizona and Georgia. He filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy last December following a $148 million defamation judgment for falsely accusing two former Georgia election workers of engaging in a nonexistent conspiracy to "steal" the 2020 election.
These blows, culminating in Thursday's D.C. disbarment, mark a stunning fall from grace for Giuliani, who, as "America's Mayor" in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, was named Time's "Person of the Year." Giuliani parlayed his popularity into a 2008 run for president in which he was an early GOP front-runner.
Giuliani spokesperson Ted Goodman slammed the D.C. court's ruling as a "miscarriage of justice."
"Members of the legal community who want to protect the integrity of our justice system should immediately speak out against this partisan, politically motivated decision," Goodman said in a statement.
Some observers linked Giuliani's disbarment to Thursday's indictment of current New York City Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat, on corruption charges.
"Tough day for New York City mayors,"
quippedDemocracy Docket founder Marc Elias.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular