Sens. Feinstein and Murphy Lead New Resolution Supporting Iran Talks

On the radar: Constructive role for Congress; Partisan push falters; LA Times says no new sanctions; Paul calls out war hawks; Missile madness; and High level talks become a game of chicken.

January 27, 2015 | Edited by Will Saetren and Jacob Marx

Feinstein-Murphy - Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) introduced a resolution in support of ongoing P5+1 nuclear negotiations with Iran. “The resolution states that the Senate is prepared to enact additional sanctions against Iran if current diplomatic efforts fail, but refuses to prejudge the outcome.”

--“Enacting new sanctions before the end of the negotiating period would gravely undermine our efforts to reach an agreement with Iran,” said Sen. Feinstein in a statement. “For those who agree that the sanctions bill in the Banking Committee is detrimental, this resolution provides an option in support of diplomacy. The resolution states that if negotiations fail or if Iran violates any agreement, then it is appropriate for Congress to swiftly pass sanctions.”

--The resolution is co-sponsored by Senators Tom Carper (D-DE), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Al Franken (D-MN), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Angus King (I-ME), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Jon Tester (D-MT) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI). http://1.usa.gov/1BfWpgB

--How it played: “Democratic senators set resolution countering push for tougher Iran sanctions,” by Patricia Zengerle for Reuters. http://reut.rs/1wz2PVr

Tweet - @SenFeinstein: Senate should consider sanctions if diplomacy fails or if Iran violates agreement. We shouldn’t prejudge the outcome. http://t.co/Q1bz8C9HZr

Resolution - The resolution “Reaffirms the policy of the United States that Iran will not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon; Supports ongoing diplomatic efforts to reach a comprehensive agreement between the P5+1 countries and Iran; Affirms that support for the prompt reimposition of suspended sanctions as well as the imposition of additional sanctions against Iran would be strong and widespread in the Senate” if negotiations fail or if Iran violates the interim or final deal.

--Full text of the resolution here. http://1.usa.gov/1DbcbvU

Dems holding off - “The push to impose new economic sanctions on Iran is facing an increasingly uphill battle toward a veto-proof majority,” reports Burgess Everett for Politico. Yesterday Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) signed on to legislation proposed by Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL), “but rounding up other Democrats may be harder and Schumer’s support is contingent, sources said, on other Democrats coming on board with him, like Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ).” Full article here. http://politi.co/1CJgFvH

Why risk it? - “Diplomats who are actually conducting the negotiations insist that meaningful progress has been made and that Iran has abided by its commitment not to expand its nuclear program during the talks in exchange for limited relief from existing sanctions. If that's the case, legislation by Congress now could derail the diplomatic process. Why take that risk?” editorializes the Los Angeles Times. http://lat.ms/1BjKMp7

GOP infighting - “Are you ready to send ground troops into Iran?” Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) asked Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Marco Rubio (R-FL) during a conservative presidential forum. If diplomacy fails, “I will vote to resume sanctions and I would vote to have new sanctions,” Sen. Paul said. “But if you do it in the middle of negotiations, you’re ruining it.” Full story by Igor Volsky for Think Progress here. http://bit.ly/1EMQiE8

Tweet - @BulletinAtomic: Back to the #IranTalks: The IAEA conducts verification in a number of ways; how much is enough http://t.co/I7gpvDDnVB

Breaking the bank - “The U.S. Air Force has announced its strategy for replacing America’s Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles—which have stood alert, awaiting Armageddon, for nearly five decades. Making nukes is hard. But squeezing another multi-billion-dollar project into the Air Force’s already bulging budget is perhaps the bigger challenge.” As James Drew writes for War is Boring, “The cost will be enormous.” Full article here. http://bit.ly/1BjQes7

Cruise missiles - “President Obama has the opportunity to make significant changes in nuclear policy in the remaining two years of his presidency—changes that would make every American more secure, while also saving money and enhancing his legacy,” writes Stephen Young for All Things Nuclear. One such initiative would be to cancel the planned new nuclear-armed cruise missile, which comes at an enormous cost (an estimated $30 billion) and does little to advance national security. Full column here. http://bit.ly/1JR9q4Z

Not a rocket - “An Israeli television station has published a number of satellite images of a launch pad at the Imam Khomeini Space Center near Semnan in Iran that purport to show a new Iranian missile,” writes Jeffrey Lewis in Arms Control Wonk. “One problem: It’s not a rocket…. It is an architectural element on the gantry, possibly an elevator.” Full post here. http://bit.ly/1H5Uns7

Spoilers in the wings - Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program have “become an international game of chicken,” with elements in each country “taunting the other to violate the terms of a 2013 pact that established the conditions under which the nuclear talks would take place.” While the U.S. Congress considers legislation that could undermine the talks, conservatives in the Iranian Parliament are weighing measures to increase Iran’s nuclear activities. Full story by David Sanger in The New York Times. http://nyti.ms/1H5XSyI

Quick Hits:

--“Let Nuclear Sanctions on Iran Serve Their Final Purpose,” by Peter Jenkins in LobeLog. http://bit.ly/1CuQXe1

--“Red Bird Express.” New podcast by Jeffrey Lewis for Arms Control Wonk. http://bit.ly/1DdctT8

--“Unlocking the Puzzle of China’s Neutron Bomb,” by Jonathan Ray in The National Interest. http://bit.ly/1yLe2bd

--“Analysis: Khamenei holds the key to nuclear deal between Iran, West,” by Yossi Melman in The Jerusalem Post. http://bit.ly/1wyTux5

Events:

--"Australia and the Bomb," featuring Christine Leah, Yale University; Christian Ostermann, Wilson Center; and Elbridge Colby, Center for a New American Security. January 28, 2:00-3:30 p.m., Wilson Center, Sixth Floor, Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington. RSVP online.

-- “Debunk the Myths of Iran Sanctions,” featuring Kate Gould, Legislative Associate for Middle East Policy, Friends Committee on National Legislation. Hosted by Physicians for Social Responsibility. Wed, Jan 28, 2015 8:30 PM - 9:30 PM EST. Register here.

--"Avoiding Disaster in a New Era of Superpower Tension." Featuring Nikolas Gvosdev, U.S. Naval War College; Fiona Hill, Brookings Institution; Ali Wyne, RAND; and Elbridge Colby, Center for a New American Security. January 29 from 6:30-8:00 p.m. Located at the FHI Conference Center, Eighth Floor, 1825 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington DC. Sponsored by PS21: Project for the Study of the 21st Century. RSVP. online

--“Rally to Say No to a $1 Trillion Nuclear Arsenal.” Hosted by Global Zero, from 1:00-3:00 p.m. on January 31. Located at the Ellipse (south of the White House), Washington, DC. RSVP online.

--“The Nuclear Enterprise: Past and Future." Featuring Michael Elliott, Deputy Director for Strategic Stability Plans and Policy Directorate, Joint Chiefs of Staff. February 3 from 9:30-10:30 a.m. Located at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Second Floor Hess Room, 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW, Washington DC. RSVP online.

Dessert:

Evolutionary ignorance - “Most people can be forgiven for ignoring the threat posed by nuclear weapons,” writes David Barash for the Los Angeles Times. “It might seem surprising, but we have been pre-programmed by our own evolutionary history to engage in such ignorance.”

--“The nuclear age is just a tiny blip tacked on to our very recent phylogenetic past, so when it comes to the greatest of all risks to human survival, we are more threatened by the instincts we lack than by those we possess.” Read the full story about humanities lack of survival skills here. http://lat.ms/1H1fKuF