January 14, 2014 | Edited by Lauren Mladenka and Geoff Wilson
Clamor for sanctions dampens - “Despite strong support for a bill in the Senate to slap new sanctions on the Islamic Republic, analysts, lawmakers and congressional aides said on Monday that the agreement to begin implementing a nuclear deal on Jan. 20 makes it harder for sanctions supporters to attract more backers,” writes Patricia Zengerle and Timothy Gardner for Reuters.
--Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat who co-sponsored the new sanctions bill, was one of a several members who said that support for passing the bill was waning. “I want to talk to some of my colleagues. I'm encouraged and heartened by the apparent progress and certainly the last thing I want to do is impede that progress.” Read the full story here. http://reut.rs/1hmzZTI [1]
Editorials on the deal:
NY Times - “If all goes according to plan, Iran will begin freezing and then rolling back its most worrisome nuclear activities on Monday under an agreement reached over the weekend with the United States and other major powers. This would be the most significant restraint ever on a program that has threatened international stability since it was first disclosed in 2002 and an undeniably important step toward the peaceful resolution of a serious dispute,” writes The New York Times in an editorial.
--“Even so, dangerously misguided forces, including leading Democrats and Republicans in Congress, are working to sabotage it.” The new sanctions bill being proposed by Senators Kirk and Menendez, “would violate the interim agreement and set unworkable conditions for a final deal.” If they succeed in tying President Obama and negotiator’s hands, “Iran is likely to embark on an even more aggressive search for a nuclear weapon. And that could leave war as the only option.” http://nyti.ms/1eQphm8 [2]
LA Times - “Over the weekend, diplomats from Iran and six major world powers finalized the details of an interim agreement designed to stop progress on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program while negotiations proceed on a permanent deal to deprive Iran of nuclear weapons,” writes the Los Angeles Times Editorial Board. “But a bipartisan group of U.S. senators continues to press recklessly for new sanctions legislation.” However, ”the best judge of whether enactment of [new sanctions] would undermine negotiations is not Congress but the branch of government that is actually engaged in those talks.” Read the full piece here. http://lat.ms/1d3njvG [3]
USA Today - “The deal completed Sunday to temporarily freeze Iran's nuclear program in exchange for minor sanctions relief is an extraordinary breakthrough, one that creates a last chance to end the Iranian nuclear threat before it leads the United States into yet another war,” writes the USA Today editorial board. The paper warns that diplomacy is delicate at this point, and that the sanctions hawks in Congress could scuttle the negotiations. http://usat.ly/1eQgEb9 [4]
StarTrib - “It should be easy for Congress to wait just six months to see if the newly inked agreement between Iran and major world powers can avoid yet another major Mideast war, and instead peacefully resolve the global standoff over Iran’s potential nuclear weapons program,” writes the Minneapolis Star Tribune. “Unfortunately, the U.S. Senate seems set on joining the House in voting to impose new sanctions on Iran. Doing so would likely not only unravel the deal, but also the global coalition that got Iran to the negotiating table in the first place.” http://strib.mn/1m020mT [5]
B-61 funding - “It does not make sense to invest $10 billion in a warhead that could be reduced in role and numbers, when a more cost effective approach, one that also meets primary military requirements, is available,” writes Stephen Young on the B-61 life extension program. Within 10 years, it is likely that “there will be no further requirement for the bombs in Europe, and they can be withdrawn to the United States and possibly retired.” The Senate’s position to significantly cut the program, which the House fully funded, should prevail. Read the full piece in The Hill. http://bit.ly/1aZO44j [6]
Nonproliferation - “The long slog toward a nuclear-free world,” by The Washington Post editorial board. http://wapo.st/1aBLgxI [7]
Anniversary - ”Getting Rid of Nukes: The Trilateral Statement After 20 Years” by Steven Pifer for the Brookings Institution. http://bit.ly/KgVkBQ [8]
Let diplomacy happen - “President Obama urged Congress on Monday to ‘give diplomacy a chance,’ imploring lawmakers to hold off on additional sanctions against Iran as negotiators seek to take advantage of a six-month interim deal,” writes Justin Sink for The Hill. The president continued by saying, “My preference is for peace and diplomacy, and this is one of the reasons why I've sent the message to Congress that now is not the time for us to impose new sanctions, now is the time for us to allow the diplomats and technical experts to do their work." http://bit.ly/1kzSRDj [9]
Positive reception - “Word that the interim nuclear deal between Iran and world powers will go into effect this month for the most part was met positively in the Iranian capital,” reports Ramin Mostaghim for the Los Angeles Times. Full article here. http://lat.ms/1hmGV3c [10]
Missed opportunities - “If ever there was a costly relic of Cold War spending that needs a dramatic overhaul it’s the U.S. strategic nuclear deterrent, a program with a price tag of $355 billion or more over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO),” writes Walter Pincus in The Washington Post. But “the Obama administration missed a chance to take a bold step to save money Thursday when Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel visited F.E. Warren Air Force Base,” saying that the United States would “invest in the modernization that we need to invest in to keep that deterrent stronger than it’s ever been.”
--”The administration had an opportunity to lessen the attraction of nuclear weapons by unilaterally lowering numbers, de-alerting some deployed systems and asking other nuclear powers to do the same. That’s a far cry from Global Zero, a distant goal both Obama and Hagel have supported. Most Americans — and most nations — would approve such moves. The United States would save money and still remain by far the most powerful military force in the world.” Read the full article here. Job announcement - “The National Iranian American Council (NIAC), the largest grassroots Iranian-American organization in the nation, is seeking a highly motivated individual with Government Affairs experience to join its Policy team.” View the full announcement here. [11]http://bit.ly/1dnnrKV [12]
Events:
--Joseph Cirincione, Ploughshares Fund, book discussion of Nuclear Nightmares: Securing the World Before It Is Too Late. Jan. 14th from 7:30-8:30 at Town Hall Seattle, 1119 Eighth Ave., Seattle. More information here. http://bit.ly/1kxQwsH [13]
--”Benefit or Burden? The Future of U.S. Tactical Nuclear Weapons.” Discussion with Rep. Jim Cooper, Gen. Norton Schwartz, and Amb. Richard Burt. Jan. 16th from 1:00-2:30 at 2456 Rayburn House Office Building. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1eA5nez [14]
--”What Will 2014 Bring for North Korea’s Nuclear Program?” Discussion with James Schoff, Toby Dalton, Go Myong-Hyun, Choi Kang, Park Jiyoung, and Shin Chang-Hoon. Jan. 21st from 9:00-12:00 at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. RSVP here. http://ceip.org/1lIxXQo [15]
--”Making Sense of Nuclear Negotiations with Iran: A Good Deal or a Bad Deal?” Discussion with Alireza Nader, Daryl Kimball and Paul Pillar. Jan. 22nd from 10:00-11:00am at 2168 Rayburn House Office Building. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/19Th8zR [16]
--”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 [17]
Topic
- Early Warning [18]
- Iran Nuclear Program [19]
- Iran sanctions [20]
- Iran Negotiations [21]
- B-61 [22]
- The New Arms Race [23]