Foreign Policy

Republicans seek to undermine U.S. foreign policy towards Iran

by

Iran-nuclear-deal-1024x576Neocons in the Republican Party, who reflexively oppose any agreement between Iran and the West, share something in common with the Islamic hard-liners in Iran. Iranian Hard-Liners Say Nuclear Accord Crosses Their Red Lines.

Their common interest was exemplified earlier this year with Sen. “Tehran” Tom Cotton’s letter signed by 47 Republican senators to the government of Iran. 47 GOP Senators Tell Iran They May Not Honor A Nuclear Deal. This stunt was too much even for the editors of The Arizona Republican. 47 senators stomp on the Constitution.

The government of Israel also opposes the Iran deal. Earlier this year, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepted an offer from House Speaker John Boehner to address the Congress shortly before elections In Israel, an unprecedented move not approved by the White House and against U.S. protocol. See Robert Kagan of the Brookings Institute, At What Price, Netanyahu?

Read more

U.S. and Cuba Embassies reopen

by

The New York Times reports today that the U.S. Embassy in Cuba Reopens After More Than 50 Years:

us-cuba_relations_300x225_1After more than a half-century defined by mistrust and rancor, the United States officially reopened its six-story embassy in the Cuban capital on Monday, the culmination of many months of negotiations to overcome decades of historical enmity and to restore diplomatic relations between the two nations.

More than two years of effort went into restoring relations between Cuba and the United States, both public and private, yet most observers say they believe it will be many more years before mutual wariness fades.

Re-establishing diplomatic relations does not resolve a host of issues for further negotiations.

Read more

U.N. Security Council unanimously approves P5+1 nuclear agreement with Iran

by

Iran-nuclear-deal-1024x576British Prime Minister David Cameron said Sunday that the world “would face Iran with a nuclear weapon” if six powers, including the U.S., had not struck a historic nuclear deal with Tehran. “I think it is so much better than the alternative. I think that if there wasn’t a deal, I think we would face Iran with a nuclear weapon,” Cameron said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” British Prime Minister David Cameron: Iran Deal ‘Better Than the Alternative’

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has hailed the nuclear deal signed between Iran and six world powers as “an important success.” Germany’s Merkel calls for speedy implementation of Iran deal.

This morning the 15 members of the U.N. Security Council, of which the “P5” powers — the U.S., Britain, France, Russia and China — are permanent members, unanimously approved the P5+1 nuclear agreement with Iran. UN Security Council endorses Iran deal.

Read more

The Perpetual War Party wants its war with Iran

by

I have noticed that the mainstream media — particularly disturbing is PBS which really  ought to demonstrate better judgment — has trotted out the Neocon architects of the Bush-Cheney regime’s unnecessary and illegal war in Iraq and illegal torture program to comment on the P5+1 world powers nuclear agreement with Iran.

NurembergTwo quick points. First, these unindicted war criminals should not be given legitimacy by giving them a seat at the table to discuss the nuclear agreement with Iran. They have forfeited any right to speak by virtue of their war crimes. The only time I want to hear from these Neocons is under oath before a Nuremberg-style war crimes tribunal (there is no statute of limitations for war crimes).

Second, if the feckless media is going to give them a seat at the table anyway, it should preface their remarks with a litany of their failures war crimes in Iraq, and make a full disclosure that these Neocons are actively engaged in seeking the next war with Iran. If the media is not going to inform the public, then do not invite these Neocons to appear on your network programs. Otherwise, the media is, once again, a complicit accessory to war crimes (and the media is also liable to prosecution under the Nuremberg Principles.)

Matt Yglesias at Vox.com has a pair of posts explaining GOP opposition not just to to the Iran agreement, but to negotiations with Iran at all, in pursuit of their desired goal for war with Iran. Why Iran hawks can’t be honest about why they hate the Iran deal:

Iran hawks displeased with the nuclear deal struck between Iran, Russia, China, the United States, and the European Union have an awful lot of complaints. But if you look closely at what they are saying, you’ll notice something funny. They don’t actually have any arguments about what Obama has done wrong or how a different administration would park the situation in a better place. What they have instead are a lot of talking points, MacGuffins, red herrings, and distractions that aim to divert attention from the core issue — hawks’ desire to avoid diplomacy and have a war.

Read more

Former American ambassadors and nuclear non-proliferation experts support the Iran nuclear agreement

by

The New York Times reports today that 100 former American ambassadors wrote to President Obama, calling the deal a “landmark agreement” and urging Congress to support it. Former U.S. Diplomats Praise Iran Deal:

GenevaMore than 100 former American ambassadors wrote to President Obama on Thursday praising the nuclear deal reached with Iran this week as a “landmark agreement” that could be effective in halting Tehran’s development of a nuclear weapon, and urging Congress to support it. American Ambassadors Letter (.pdf).

“If properly implemented, this comprehensive and rigorously negotiated agreement can be an effective instrument in arresting Iran’s nuclear program and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons in the volatile and vitally important region of the Middle East,” said the letter, whose signers include diplomats named by presidents of both parties.

They wrote that they recognized the deal “is not a perfect or risk-free settlement of this problem.”

“However,” they added, “we believe that without it, the risks to the security of the United States and our friends and allies would be far greater.”

The accord, they continued, “deserves congressional support and the opportunity to show it can work.”

* * *

Signers of the letter, spearheaded by the Iran Project, a New York-based organization that is dedicated to “a peaceful resolution to the nuclear standoff,” include prominent retired diplomats appointed by Mr. Obama and his Republican and Democratic predecessors.

Read more