Follow us on social

google cta
Screen-shot-2021-03-31-at-5.34.55-pm

Progressive Dems: Biden needs to move first on Iran nuclear deal

Reps. Murphy and Khanna are frustrated with the pace of JCPOA re-entry, but the White House may be ready to make some moves.

Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

Two progressive Democratic members of Congress argued on a Wednesday panel that the United States needs to make the first move in returning to the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D–Conn.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D–Calif.) called for a more proactive U.S. stance towards the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action at a video event hosted by the National Iranian American Council and several other pro-diplomacy groups.

“It was a disappointing start when it comes to Iran policy from this administration,” Khanna said. “We have to try to get back into the JCPOA by getting back into the JCPOA, not playing a game of chicken.”

He suggested that State Department Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley has had his hands tied by other factions in the administration.

“I know Rob Malley understands this, I know he is qualified to do this, so I wonder where the roadblocks are,” Khanna added.

Under the original JCPOA, six world powers agreed to lift the international embargo on the Iranian economy in exchange for strict limits on Iran’s nuclear program. The Trump administration broke from the agreement in 2018, and Iran retaliated by increasing some nuclear activities.

The Biden administration has said that it wants to return to the JCPOA, but initially took a hardline stance by demanding that Iran make the first move. There are signs that the U.S. position is becoming more flexible, although Iran has reportedly now hardened its own stance.

“The United States was the first to leave the agreement, and so the United States shouldn’t be wary of taking the first step back into the agreement,” Murphy said. “There is no weakness in the United States admitting that, but for our noncompliance, the JCPOA would still be alive and well today.”

Both Murphy and Khanna noted that the United States could lift economic sanctions immediately, and restore them if Iran failed to reciprocate.

Murphy claimed that the Trump administration’s policy had a “very small silver lining” because it proved that “maximum pressure was a miserable, one hundred percent failure.”

“Trump did exactly what opponents of the JCPOA recommended,” he said. “It’s important to remind the opponents of the agreement that their argument has been tested. Their argument has failed.”

Murphy and Khanna also noted that the United States needs to get Iran to the table in order to resolve the bloody conflict in Yemen.

And Murphy called for a deeper reset in the U.S. relationship with the region that moves away from sectarian views.

“We need to have a broader conversation about whether we really have an interest in who wins these fights between the Sunni and Shi’a side of the region,” he said. “We certainly may have a favorite, but the question is whether we need to weigh in as decisively as we have over the past decade.”


Photos via @RepRoKhanna and shutterstock.com
google cta
Reporting | Middle East
Colby: Israel is fighting a different war in Iran
Top image credit: Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby speaks at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee. (Screengrab via armed-services.senate.gov)

Colby: Israel is fighting a different war in Iran

QiOSK

The U.S. is pursuing “scoped and reasonable objectives” in its military campaign against Iran and is not seeking regime change through force, argued Undersecretary of Defense Elbridge Colby in a Tuesday Senate hearing.

When pressed about why the campaign began with the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Colby declined to comment directly. “I’m talking about the goals of the American military campaign,” he told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Those are Israeli operations.”

keep readingShow less
US missiles
Top photo credit: . DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Vince Parker, U.S. Air Force.

Trump: We have 'unlimited' weapons to fight 'forever' war

QiOSK

In a startling Truth Social post overnight on Monday, President Donald Trump defied reality and claimed that U.S. weapons were "unlimited" and the U.S. could fight "forever" with "these supplies."


keep readingShow less
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

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.