- Bill Clinton to endorse Charlie Rangel for re-election
- Pfc. Bradley Manning is now Pfc. Chelsea Manning: Court says so
- Secret base U.S. special forces used to train Libyans now under terrorist control: report
- 9th suspect in N.C. kidnapping turns self in to FBI
- L.A. sheriff admits to testing flyover spy program without notifying residents
- Foreign minister vows response if Russians are attacked in Ukraine
- Robert Griffin III to drive pace car before Richmond NASCAR race
- Material on Australian shore examined in jet hunt
- Bomb, shooting in Egypt kills 2 police officers
- Tenn. woman receives two-year sentence for stealing $364K meant for homeless veterans
Obama faces worry at home, abroad over Iran talks
WASHINGTON — President Obama’s hopes for a nuclear deal with Iran now depend in part on his ability to keep a lid on both hard-liners on Capitol Hill and anxious allies abroad, including Israel, the Gulf states and even France.
Each of the wary parties is guided in some measure by domestic political interests. But they also share concerns that Obama may want a breakthrough with Iran so badly that he would be willing to accept a deal that prematurely eases economic pressure on Iran and gives the Islamic republic space to pursue a nuclear weapon.
“All of us want to see diplomacy,” Sen. Bob Corker, Tennessee Republican, told NBC News. “But we’re also concerned about an administration that seems really ready to jump into the arms of folks and potentially deal away some of the leverage we have.”
“It would be imprudent to want an agreement more than the Iranians do,” Sen. Robert Menendez, New Jersey Democrat, wrote in an editorial in USA Today.
Indeed, there’s little question Obama desires a deal with Iran, which could give him a boost during a shaky stretch in his presidency that has included the deeply flawed rollout of his signature health care law, new revelations about U.S. government spying and falling approval ratings. Successful negotiations with Iran also could validate Obama’s long-held belief that the U.S. should be willing to talk to adversaries without preconditions.
Obama and his advisers reject the notion that they are naive about Iran’s intentions. And they insist the world must test whether new Iranian President Hassan Rouhani is serious about his announced desire for improved relations with the West.
Colin Kahl, who served as a top Pentagon Middle East official during Obama’s first term, said the very fact that the success or failure of a nuclear agreement would be so critical to Obama’s presidency ensures the administration won’t sign off on a subpar agreement with Tehran.
“The president sees preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon as not only central to vital U.S. national security interests, but also to his own legacy,” said Kahl, now a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. “They’re not going to accept a bad deal.”
Talks between Iran and six world powers — the U.S., France, Russia, China, the United Kingdom and Germany — ended over the weekend without an agreement on a preliminary deal that would have set the stage for broader talks. Diplomats said talks broke down in part because the international powers refused to formally recognize Iran’s right to enrich uranium.
France also expressed concerns that proposed limits on Iran’s ability to make nuclear fuel don’t go far enough. France also sounded alarms over a planned heavy water reactor that would produce greater amounts of byproduct plutonium, which can be used in nuclear weapons production. Western officials later tried to gloss over the French concerns, but their public comments raised questions about cracks in the international coalition.
Iran insists it is not pursuing a bomb and only wants to enrich uranium for energy and medical applications.
Negotiations are due to resume in Geneva on Nov. 20. In exchange for nuclear concessions from Iran, the U.S. and world powers are offering Tehran limited and reversible relief from economic sanctions that have strained its economy.
In the days leading up to the next round of Geneva talks, Obama is likely to confront renewed skepticism from congressional lawmakers and allies overseas.
Some U.S. lawmakers oppose the president’s willingness to ease sanctions on Iran, even temporarily, and instead want to layer on new economic penalties. At the Obama administration’s request, a sanctions bill in the Senate Banking Committee was put on hold, but it’s unclear how much longer lawmakers are willing to wait.
Obama personally placed a call last week to Sen. Mark Kirk, Illinois Republican, a key sanctions drafter, to ask that legislation be stopped. Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and White House chief of staff Denis McDonough have all talked with lawmakers in recent days. And the White House is dispatching Kerry to Capitol Hill on Wednesday to implore the Senate Banking Committee to pause the legislation once again.
TWT Video Picks
Feds who send arms against ranch families betray American values
- Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy hailed as patriot, ripped as lawless deadbeat
- CARSON: When government looks more like foe than friend
- Pentagon plans to replace flight crews with 'full-time' robots
- Georgia governor signs bill expanding gun rights
- America is an oligarchy, not a democracy or republic, university study finds
- Texas is next! AG warns BLM wants 90,000 acres after Bundy ranch standoff
- Professor apologizes after blasting Republicans in class
- Justice Dept.'s new clemency guidelines: Crack offenders most obvious candidates
- Ukraine claims torture by pro-Russian forces on the heels of Biden's stern warning to Moscow
- Ministry of Truth: SCOTUS skeptical of law to police campaign 'lies'
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.
Celebrity deaths in 2014