Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1018169170-scaled

Progressives urge House Dems to help Biden save the Iran nuclear deal

Foreseeing a battle to re-engage Iran in a potential Biden administration, more than a dozen progressive groups sent a letter to Capitol Hill calling on House Democrats to dig in.

Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

Sixteen progressive groups have signed a letter urging the next House Foreign Affairs Committee chair to help a “potential Biden administration” save the nuclear deal with Iran.

All three candidates to run the committee — one of two powerful foreign policy bodies in Congress — have voiced their support for the deal. Progressives are now asking for specific commitments from the candidates, including a promise to put economic sanctions relief on the table and stop any “poison pill” legislation that would undermine diplomacy with Iran.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D–Calif.) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D–N.Y.) are currently favored to win the chairmanship, while Rep. Joaquín Castro (D–TX) is running as an insurgent progressive candidate.

“This is potentially the first major foreign policy issue an HFAC chair might have to deal with,” said Ryan Costello, policy director at the National Iranian American Council, one of the signatories of the letter. “The JCPOA has been a real foreign policy litmus test for members of Congress. It’s gotten more scrutiny than maybe any other of Obama’s diplomatic deals.”

The letter was also signed by the Arms Control Association, the progressive Jewish organization J-Street, and  foreign policy-focused groups  Just Foreign Policy and Win Without War.

The United States and five other world powers had agreed to lift international economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for restrictions on the Iranian nuclear program, a 2015 deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action.

President Donald Trump broke from the deal in 2018, and instead began a “maximum pressure” campaign against the Iranian government.

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden seems committed to restoring the JCPOA, as his advisors have said that they would support a return to the deal or something like it.

But other roadblocks could emerge from Congress. Friday’s letter from progressives warns that, “many in Congress sought to play spoiler” during the original JCPOA negotiations “by undermining America’s diplomats as they sought to trade in sanctions for far-reaching nuclear concessions.”

“The last time [a deal with Iran] happened, it was a major slog through Congress, with a lot of misinformation about the agreement, and a lot of money being poured in against the agreement,” Costello said.

Indeed, the House voted to disapprove of the JCPOA in 2015, but the measure ultimately failed after Senate Democrats filibustered the bill.

Rep. Eliot Engel (D–N.Y.), the current chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, was one of nineteen House Democrats who joined with Republicans to vote against the deal in 2015.

Members of Congress have also supported new sanctions measures ostensibly unrelated to the nuclear file that could jeopardize diplomacy with Iran.

Congress overwhelmingly voted for new sanctions on Iran, North Korea, and Russia in 2017, leading Iran to accuse the United States of violating the nuclear deal.

A majority of House members signed a letter in March 2020 calling for a new arms embargo against Iran. The Trump administration has used the letter to justify “sanctions snapback,” a risky diplomatic move that threatens to kill the JCPOA once and for all.

But progressives now see an opportunity to push Democrats to the left on foreign policy.

Engel will not be returning to Congress in 2021, as he was defeated in New York’s June primary elections, with Reps. Sherman, Meeks, and Castro vying to take over his position as chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

A coalition of seventy progressive groups led by Demand Progress has called on Democrats to adopt a “vision of restraint and progressive realism,” and has tried to organize public discussions involving all three candidates.

Friday’s letter ties the Iran issue to several issues important to the progressive foreign policy coalition.

It calls for the House Foreign Affairs Committee to examine how economic sanctions have affected civilians in Iran — especially in light of the coronavirus pandemic — and asked that the United States “put additional incentives on the table in exchange for Iranian concessions on regional security and human rights.”

The letter also asks for an investigation into “the sidelining of career civil service officers for their work on the JCPOA.”

An internal State Department investigation last year found that the Trump administration had pushed out a Iranian-American career official after more hawkish officials baselessly accused her of loyalty to Iran and anti-Trump bias.

The best evidence of progressive groups’ success so far may be the fact that all three candidates for HFAC chair support the JCPOA.

Meeks and Castro were staunch supporters of the deal from the beginning, and boycotted a 2015 speech by Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu urging Congress to reject the JCPOA.

Sherman had originally joined Engel and the Republicans in voting against the JCPOA in 2015, but has since gone on the record in support of restoring the deal.

“Clearly, that’s something that’s shifted, maybe as a result of the HFAC chair race, because a majority of members are opposed to the Trump administration's approach that has brought us to the brink of war,” Costello said.


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

Photo: W. Scott McGill via Shutterstock.com
google cta
Reporting | Middle East
Von Der Leyen Zelensky
Top image credit: paparazzza / Shutterstock.com
The collapse of Europe's Ukraine policy has sparked a blame game

They are calling fast-track Ukraine EU bid 'nonsense.' So why dangle it?

Europe

Trying to accelerate Ukraine’s entry into the European Union makes sense as part of the U.S.-sponsored efforts to end the war with Russia. But there are two big obstacles to this happening by 2027: Ukraine isn’t ready, and Europe can’t afford it.

As part of ongoing talks to end the war in Ukraine, the Trump administration had advanced the idea that Ukraine be admitted into the European Union by 2027. On the surface, this appears a practical compromise, given Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s concession that Ukraine will drop its aspiration to join NATO.

keep readingShow less
World War II Normandy
Top photo credit: American soldiers march a group of German prisoners along a beachhead in Northern France after which they will be sent to England. June 6, 1944. (U.S. Army Signal Corps Photographic Files/public domain)

Marines know we don't kill unarmed survivors for a reason

Military Industrial Complex

As the Trump Administration continues to kill so-called Venezuelan "narco terrorists" through "non-international armed conflict" (whatever that means), it is clear it is doing so without Congressional authorization and in defiance of international law.

Perhaps worse, through these actions, the administration is demonstrating wanton disregard for centuries of Western battlefield precedent, customs, and traditions that righteously seek to preserve as many lives during war as possible.

keep readingShow less
Amanda Sloat
Top photo credit: Amanda Sloat, with Department of State, in 2015. (VOA photo/Wikimedia Commons)

Pranked Biden official exposes lie that Ukraine war was inevitable

Europe

When it comes to the Ukraine war, there have long been two realities. One is propagated by former Biden administration officials in speeches and media interviews, in which Russian President Vladimir Putin’s illegal invasion had nothing to do with NATO’s U.S.-led expansion into the now shattered country, there was nothing that could have been done to prevent what was an inevitable imperialist land-grab, and that negotiations once the war started to try to end the killing were not only impossible, but morally wrong.

Then there is the other, polar opposite reality that occasionally slips through when officials think few people are listening, and which was recently summed up by former Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Europe at the National Security Council Amanda Sloat, in an interview with Russian pranksters whom she believed were aides to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.