Considering the Upsides of an Iran Nuclear Deal

January 22, 2014 | Edited by Lauren Mladenka and Geoff Wilson

Positive outcomes - When trying to make their case, both critics and supporters of the Iran nuclear deal “tend to focus solely on the downside. But what about the potential benefits of a successful negotiation?” asks Stephen Walt in Foreign Policy. ”First and most obviously, the United States will make money. We tend to focus on the costs that economic sanctions have imposed on Iran, conveniently forgetting that sanctions also impose costs on us.” Further, “a better relationship with Iran would increase America's overall influence throughout the region” and “make it easier for Washington and Tehran to cooperate on issues where our interests are, in fact, aligned,” such as stabilizing Afghanistan and addressing drug trafficking.

--“If skeptics can try to scuttle diplomatic progress by outlining preposterous worst-case scenarios like that, then advocates should remind them that the benefits from a thaw with Tehran could be significant and are far more likely.” Read the full article here. http://atfp.co/1c3hSRZ

Incorporating Congress - “The world got a little bit safer on Monday, when the International Atomic Energy Agency certified that Iran had begun to comply with a six-month interim agreement to freeze — and, in some cases, roll back — critical elements of its nuclear program,” writes the Boston Globe editorial board. And while “a long-term deal, meant to sketch out the contours of Iran’s nuclear program into the future, is fraught with contentious issues... one thing is clear: A bill in the Senate that threatens new sanctions on Iran isn’t helping,” with Iranian negotiators threatening “to walk out of talks if new sanctions are passed.”

--“But as unhelpful as some members of Congress may have been, Obama should resist the urge to shut them out. If talks are successful, Obama will need Congress to give the agreement its blessing and remove sanctions. If talks fail, he will need lawmakers to help think through military options. Either way, Congress has a role to play and must be brought into the process.” Read the full article here. http://b.globe.com/1msDjgg

Executive action - “Presidents often have no choice but to act on their authority,” writes Katrina vanden Heuvel in an opinion piece concerning the need for unilateral executive action in some policy areas. With regards to nuclear weapons she says that the president should use an executive order to bring the U.S. nuclear arsenal off “hair-trigger” status.

--“To this day, the United States and Russia have several hundred missiles ready to launch at a moment’s notice. Even George W. Bush considered this an ‘unnecessary vestige of Cold War confrontation.’ George H.W. Bush unilaterally took hundreds of missiles and bombers off alert. Obama could make good on his own promise and issue a long-overdue executive order that would make the planet far less dangerous.” Full article in The Washington Post. http://wapo.st/1kXNVZg

Cheating epidemic - “Cheating on proficiency exams has been common among Air Force officers who operate nuclear-armed, ground-based missiles, ex-launch officers say. ‘Everybody cheats on every test that they can, and they have for decades,’ said an anonymous former launch-control officer, who was stationed at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana from 2006 to 2010 and admitted to cheating on exams himself.”

--“The Air Force announced last week that 34 ICBM officers at Malmstrom had been implicated in a cheating scandal. The service discovered the wrongdoing while pursuing a separate investigation into drug possession by some airmen, including multiple officers with Air Force Global Strike Command, which manages the nation's roughly 450 silo-based ballistic missiles. All ICBM officers in the Air Force were ordered to retake the proficiency exam.” Read the full story from Global Security Newswire here. http://bit.ly/1f6Ee5q

Nuclear monitoring report - The Defense Science Board has released its new report on “Assessment of Nuclear Monitoring and Verification Technologies.” Get the full report here. (pdf) http://bit.ly/1g09YMx

House getting involved - “Two House panels will examine the details of the Obama administration's nuclear deal with Iran next week amid pressure from Congress to slap new sanctions on the country,” reports Julian Pecquet for The Hill. “The Middle East and nonproliferation panels of the House Foreign Affairs Committee will hold a joint hearing on Tuesday, just hours before President Obama's State of the Union address. The hearing aims to probe the Nov. 24 agreement freezing Iran's nuclear program, which only went into effect Monday.” Read the full report here. http://bit.ly/LTO94e

Dems hold off - “Under pressure from the Obama administration, Senate Democrats who favor a new batch of sanctions on Iran signaled a willingness to hold off on levying penalties to give diplomatic negotiations a chance,” reports Donna Cassata for The Denver Post. “Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who heads the Armed Services Committee, told reporters on Tuesday that the measure would be a ‘mistake’ that could reduce the chances of negotiations succeeding.” Get the full article here. http://bit.ly/1g08AcI

Iran leadership - “While Rouhani has not ushered in a new Iran, Tehran has adopted a more conciliatory tone on its nuclear program since he took office. This shift is more than just talk, but the West will have to carefully calibrate its response to determine whether Rouhani’s changed rhetoric signals the beginning of a new direction for Iran,” writes Cornelius Adebahr in a paper titled “Tehran Calling: Understanding a new Iranian Leadership.” Read the analysis at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. http://ceip.org/1bicRk7

Event:

--”Resolved: The United States Should Modernize Only One Leg of the Nuclear Triad.” Debate with Christopher Preble and Elbridge Colby. Jan. 27th from 6:00-8:00 at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/L7utt2