Eye on Iran: Lobbying Fight Over Iran Nuclear Deal Centers on Democrats

Join UANI           Top Stories NYT: "From his rented vacation home on Martha's Vineyard with sweeping views of the Atlantic Ocean, President Obama has been making phone calls to Democratic members of Congress, trying to rally support for the nuclear deal with Iran that faces a vote next month. 'If you support the deal, we'd like you to make that clear,' he tells the lawmakers, according to a White House official who would describe the private calls only on condition of anonymity. 'And if you still have concerns, we want to be able to answer those questions.' The personal appeals from the president are part of an orchestrated lobbying effort by the White House, supported by a coalition of antiwar and progressive organizations, aimed at persuading Democrats who are undecided about the nuclear agreement with Iran to vote against a Republican bid to block it. Meeting weekly in a conference room in the downtown Washington office of the Ploughshares Fund, a foundation devoted to eradicating nuclear weapons, the coalition strategizes and plans advertising, letters and petition drives to press its case. Ploughshares also finances many of the participants in the effort... which says it has spent $11 million over the past six years advocating for a nuclear deal with Iran. The organization now is acting as a hub for groups pushing for approval of the agreement... The White House has relied heavily on the echo chamber of supportive voices as it seeks to demonstrate backing from prominent foreign policy and national security figures - it calls them 'validators' - who publicly describe the virtues of the accord. Many of the groups that have organized the public comments, including the New York-based Iran Project, have received money from Ploughshares. 'There's been a steady drumbeat of people outside the day-to-day politics making the case with us, and that is by design,' the White House official said. 'We've been working with all the outside groups on this.'" http://t.uani.com/1Mw4jf3 NYT: "The commander of the Navy's Fifth Fleet was in his office on the afternoon of July 25 when he got the phone call: An Iranian Navy frigate in the Gulf of Aden had approached a ship where an American military helicopter had just landed. Crew members on the Iranian ship pointed a heavy machine gun at the American helicopter, an alarming provocation at a time when critics are trying to kill a nuclear deal limiting Iran's nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. The American helicopter, following standing orders to defuse tensions instead of elevating them, took off from the ship, but the Iranian crew continued to track it with the gun for a few moments before turning away... In the crystalline waters of the Arabian Sea, it is spy versus spy between the United States and Iran... In the skies and waters of the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz, the Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Aden, the two continue to constantly watch each other. American naval ships openly roam the waters along Iran's 1,100-mile-long southern coastline, their radar trained on the Iranian shore and on Iranian ships leaving their harbors. Iranian fighter jets patrol the skies, keeping an eye on American combat planes that take off from an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf every time an Iranian jet comes close to their ship." http://t.uani.com/1hlzpus AP: "President Barack Obama has 'a great likelihood of success' in his showdown with congressional Republicans on the Iran nuclear deal, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell grudgingly acknowledged on Monday. The GOP-led Senate and House are expected to turn down the deal next month, with the Kentucky Republican calling it flawed and House Speaker John Boehner criticizing the accord. The deal with Tehran and world powers would curb Iran's nuclear program in exchange for relief from economic sanctions. Obama has pledged to veto a congressional resolution of disapproval. The question then becomes whether opponents of the accord can muster the votes to override the president. Offering a preview of the struggle, McConnell talked about the difficulty in achieving an override. Obama needs 34 Senate Democrats to sustain a veto, and 20 have announced they are backing the deal. In the House, 146 Democrats are necessary to sustain a veto and 48 have expressed their support for the accord, compared to 10 opponents. 'He can win by getting one-third plus one of either house,' McConnell told a business group in his home state of Kentucky. 'So he's still got a great likelihood of success.' ... 'I hope we can defeat it, but the procedure is obviously stacked in the president's favor,' McConnell told reporters afterward. 'We'll see.'" http://t.uani.com/1TRbJKl Nuclear Program & Agreement Reuters: "Iran will sign a contract with Russia next week to buy four S-300 surface-to-air missile systems, the Iranian defense minister said on Tuesday, bringing Tehran closer to acquiring an advanced air defense capability. Russian state arms producer Almaz-Antey in June said it would supply Iran with a modernized version of the S-300, among the world's most capable air defense systems, once a commercial agreement was reached. 'The text of the contract is ready and our friends will go to Russia next week to sign the contract,' Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan was quoted as saying by the Fars news agency. Russia says it canceled a contract to deliver S-300s to Iran in 2010 under pressure from the West. But President Vladimir Putin lifted that self-imposed ban in April following an interim nuclear deal between Iran and world powers. Tuesday's announcement came a day after Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif visited Moscow to discuss the civil war in Syria, in which Tehran and Moscow support President Bashar al-Assad." http://t.uani.com/1KtJ74I Free Beacon: "A senior Iranian official declared on Monday that international nuclear inspectors would only be permitted into the country once they receive approval from the Islamic Republic's Intelligence Ministry, putting another roadblock between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Iran's contested nuclear sites. Sayyed Abbas Araqchi, Iran's deputy foreign minister and one of the top negotiators in talks that led to the recently inked nuclear deal, told the country's state-controlled press that Iran's intelligence apparatus must approve of any inspector who is issued a visa to enter Iran. This requirement could complicate efforts to prove to the world that Iran is being fully transparent and that nuclear inspectors inside the country are neutral. Iran has already stated that no American inspector would be permitted into the country under the deal. The accord also grants Iran a 24-day notice period before inspectors enter any site suspected of being used for nuclear weapons work." http://t.uani.com/1MABdfZ Free Beacon: "Iranian leaders prevented a top International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) official from disclosing to U.S. officials the nature of secret side deals with the Islamic Republic by threatening harm to him, according to regional reports. Yukiya Amano, IAEA director general, purportedly remained silent about the nature of certain side deals during briefings with top U.S. officials because he feared such disclosures would lead to retaliation by Iran, according to the spokesman for Iran's Atomic Energy Organization (AEOI). Amano was in Washington recently to brief members of Congress and others about the recently inked nuclear accord. However, he did not discuss the nature of side deals with Iran that the United States is not permitted to know about. Iran apparently threatened Amano in a letter meant to ensure he did not reveal specific information about the nature of nuclear inspections going forward, according to Iranian AEOI spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi. This disclosure has only boosted suspicions among some that the Iranians are willing and able to intimidate the top nuclear watchdog and potentially undermine the verification regime that Obama administration officials have dubbed a key component of the nuclear accord. 'In a letter to Yukiya Amano, we underlined that if the secrets of the agreement (roadmap between Iran and the IAEA) are revealed, we will lose our trust in the Agency; and despite the US Congress's pressures, he didn't give any information to them,' Kamalvandi was quoted as saying Monday during a meeting with Iranian lawmakers, according to Tehran's state-controlled Fars News Agency. 'Had he done so, he himself would have been harmed,' the official added." http://t.uani.com/1LhyLYQ Fars (Iran): "Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Ali Akbar Salehi said his country will be the winning party even if the nuclear deal that is the result of years of negotiations fails to receive the approval of the US Congress. 'The fate of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCOPA) is not fully clear yet since there is commotion in the US, and the Congress and the US administration have stood up to each other,' Salehi said, addressing a gathering in Tehran on Sunday. He said Iran has already achieved its goal. 'No matter the JCPOA is approved or disapproved by the US Congress and even if Obama fails to do anything, we will be the winning party,' he added. Salehi explained that Iran will be the winner because if the Congress doesn't approve the JCPOA, then the US will face problems in maintaining its political credibility and improving its economic conditions, while Iran has not violated the norms and has complied with its undertakings." http://t.uani.com/1E0J2ZM Congressional Vote NYT: "Partisanship has become the pre-eminent scapegoat for American political failure, an all-purpose explanation for Washington's inability to act. Yet in rare circumstances, it can actually guarantee action. So, notwithstanding an acrimonious debate, polarization makes the United States' acceptance of the Iran nuclear deal very likely. That is because the mechanism for congressional consideration, agreed on by Republican leaders and the White House, reverses the typical legislative imperative. Instead of requiring an extraordinary majority to act, it requires one to stop action - which means partisanship is all President Obama needs to approve the deal. The Republican-controlled House and Senate can pass a resolution next month disapproving the deal, as lawmakers in both parties expect they will. Mr. Obama can then veto that resolution, as he has promised to do. To override that veto and block the deal, Republican leaders would need two-thirds majorities in each chamber. That would require roughly 25 percent of congressional Democrats to abandon the president on his biggest foreign policy initiative. In 21st-century American politics, that is an exceptionally high bar... Mr. Obama polarized the debate further by asserting that Iranian 'hard-liners chanting 'Death to America' ' were 'making common cause with the Republican caucus' in fighting the deal. In this case, polarization represents his shortest path to victory." http://t.uani.com/1Pxpf59 Politico: "The White House campaign to save the Iran nuclear deal is getting a boost from the God squad. Faith-based groups, many of them increasingly nervous about the well-funded push by opponents of the deal, are intensifying their lobbying of lawmakers ahead of an important congressional vote on the agreement. Over the weekend, the Rev. Al Sharpton called on black churches to mobilize in support of the nuclear deal. On Monday, a group of 340 rabbis from multiple strands of Judaism released a letter, urging lawmakers to vote for the agreement. And plans are in the works for a coordinated rollout of endorsements by a number of religious groups next week, an organizer said. The campaign is led largely by Catholic and Quaker groups, such as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Friends Committee on National Legislation, and it reflects many of the organizations' traditional anti-war stances." http://t.uani.com/1UQUmvz Bloomberg: "The U.S. debate over the Iran nuclear accord is turning in part on conflicting assessments of the Islamic Republic's likely shopping list. While President Barack Obama contends Iran will fund urgent domestic needs with most of the money it obtains once frozen assets are released, his Republican opponents say they expect the newly flush Islamic Republic to binge on weapons support for regional terrorism. As lobbying intensifies ahead of a vote of disapproval in Congress next month, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other opponents say the deal to curb Iran's nuclear program would give it a flood of funds that leaders of the theocratic state could funnel to military or regional proxies." http://t.uani.com/1PjUEaD Politico: "Dozens of arms control and nuclear nonproliferation experts have signed a statement endorsing the Iran nuclear deal, the latest salvo in a lobbying campaign battle ahead of a congressional vote next month on President Barack Obama's landmark agreement with Tehran. The Arms Control Association, a nonpartisan group based in Washington, will release the statement Tuesday morning. It declares the deal limiting Iran's nuclear program in return for sanctions relief 'a net-plus for international nuclear nonproliferation efforts.' Among the 75 signatories are the former CIA agent Valerie Plame and her husband, Joe Wilson, prominent opponents of the Iraq War. Others include Hans Blix, a former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Morton Halperin, a foreign policy veteran of three administrations; and Thomas Pickering, a retired diplomat and former U.S. ambassador to Israel." http://t.uani.com/1KtNgWz Commerce WSJ: "Iran is once again the nation posing the largest money-laundering risk across the globe, according to an annual index. The 2015 edition of the index, published by the Basel Institute on Governance, covers more than 150 countries; it's the fourth edition of the rankings. Little changed overall compared to the 2014 edition, the Basel Institute said." http://t.uani.com/1HTT9KL Opinion & Analysis Sen. Bob Corker in WashPost: "By passing the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act with enough votes to overcome a veto, Congress ensured that it would have the opportunity to review and vote on the nuclear agreement with Iran. Now that the Obama administration has reached what it believes to be an acceptable agreement, it is Congress's responsibility to determine whether this agreement will be in our national interest, will make the United States safer and will prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapons program. I do not believe that it will. Rather than end Iran's nuclear enrichment program, over time this deal industrializes the program of the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. For a deal that must be built on verification and not trust, the inspections process is deeply flawed. Through verbal presentations regarding possible military dimensions, many in Congress are aware of the unorthodox arrangements agreed to by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the administration and our negotiating partners to keep from upsetting Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Those actual agreements remain secret, but we know that at best they are most unusual and speak to the P5+1's low commitment to holding Iran's feet to the fire. Perhaps a larger issue is beyond the scope of the deal itself. Absent a clearly articulated policy for the region, this deal will become the linchpin of the United States' Middle East strategy. We will be relying on Iran to help achieve our goals in Iraq, Syria and perhaps elsewhere. This abrupt rebalancing could have the effect of driving others in the region to take greater risks, leading to greater instability. Iran was fully aware of this, which helped the regime continually erode the deal to its benefit, and it will become an impediment when we try to push back against potential violations of the agreement. Iran, on the other hand, does have a regional strategy that this deal will boost and strengthen. Since negotiations began in earnest after President Hassan Rouhani was elected in June 2013, Iran has co-opted the Iraqi security sector, doubled down on its support of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and cemented Hezbollah as an expeditionary shock force... Many say now is the time for the United States to push back against Iran. The best way to do that is for Congress to reject an agreement that strengthens Iran with hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade, removes the conventional weapons and ballistic missile technology embargoes on Iran and allows for a U.S.-approved, industrial-scale enrichment program for which Iran has zero practical need. We have more leverage than we will ever have, but under this deal that leverage will flip in approximately nine months, when most major sanctions are relieved. Iran will further deepen its regional strength. Unfortunately, the agreement ties our hands in countering Iran's efforts. If we try to push back, Iran will threaten to speed up its nuclear development since it already will have a windfall of money, a rapidly growing economy and alliances built with our partners, who will feast on the mercantile benefits of doing business with Iran. The idea that a future president will somehow have the same options available as today, when Iran is poor and isolated, is fanciful. I came to these negotiations with an open mind. Prioritizing engagement over coercion in an attempt to end three decades of animosity with Iran appeals to the American idealism in us all. And while we should strongly support diplomacy, the other side must believe there are real consequences in its failure. In this case, Iran never felt that, resulting in a very disappointing outcome for our country. Throughout history, Congress has rejected or altered hundreds of international agreements, many of them multilateral. For the administration to say there is no other deal than this one is an effort to negate Congress's important role and responsibility. The administration has repeatedly stated that this agreement is about ensuring Iran does not get a nuclear weapon. Therefore, the agreement should be one that allows us to maintain leverage and ensure it is enforceable, is verifiable and holds Iran accountable. This deal does not do that and instead leaves the United States vulnerable to a resurgent Iran wealthier and more able to work its will in the Middle East. Congress should reject this deal and send it back to the president." http://t.uani.com/1TRdA1U Iranian Dissidents in The Daily Beast: "In the past few weeks, some Iranian activists have vocally supported the nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 (China, Russia, France, United Kingdom, United States and Germany). While we deeply respect the experience and views of these men and women, it is important to hear all perspectives. We represent another collection of Iranian activists who share the world's hope for a better future but believe that appeasing the Iranian regime will lead to a more dangerous world. We have spent our lives advocating for peace, justice and freedom in Iran. We represent a diverse array of Iranians who hope to warn the world of the danger of this regime regardless of how many centrifuges spin in Iran. This deal will provide up to $150 billion windfall of cash into the bank account of our tyrants and theocrats. This money will not be spent on the Iranian people but rather to enrich a repressive regime. Sadly, the world has not demanded real improvements in human rights. Thousands of activists continue to languish behind bars (including several Americans) and it is tragic that their release was not included in these discussions. We are sounding the alarm bells before it is too late. Those who care about peace should help restore focus to the Iranian regime's brutal human rights records, its support for global terror and role in destabilizing the Middle East. More pressure should be applied to the regime, not less. One day when the Iranian people are finally free, they will hold an accounting of who stood on their side and who stood on the regime's. It is not too late to hold the Iranian regime accountable for their continued human rights violations. Today in Iran, political prisoners are tortured. Bloggers, journalists and teachers remain behind bars. Sexual and religious rights are trampled. Women are treated as second class citizens. Western apologists and appeasers of Iranian theocracy do no favors to the Iranian people. They distance the likelihood of positive change and undercut the hopes of the Iranian people. When the Iranian regime no longer fears its people, then the world will no longer have a reason to fear the Iranian regime." http://t.uani.com/1K3Mbc2 Saeed Ghasseminejad in NYDN: "Iranian dissidents are increasingly worried that - with the nuclear deal signed and business prospects looming - the West will give Iran a pass on human rights. European dignitaries visiting Tehran in recent weeks refrained from criticizing the regime's domestic record, which has actually gotten worse under President Hassan Rouhani. But now is when the West, on a clock, most urgently needs to support dissidents. Otherwise, a decade from now, when restrictions on Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs are lifted under this deal, the West will confront the same militant and terrorist-sponsoring regime that rules Iran today - now with nuclear arms. Iranian dissidents are sounding the alarm. Heshmat Tabarzadi, who spent the better part of the last 15 years in prison, wrote that 'these days, after the mullahs achieved the agreement they needed, pressure on civil society is increasing.' Fariborz Raees Dana, a left-wing economist and also a former political prisoner, told the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran that even with a deal, 'a government that considers censorship its main power tool and sees it as a part of its ideology, will continue it in any way it can.' Sadegh Ziba Kalam, a reformer and longtime supporter of president Hassan Rouhani, believes the deal will only to a freer society if Iranians pressure the regime, warning against any expectation that Rouhani would be pre-active on this front. This skepticism is at odds with the tone in the West, where President Obama and others express hope the deal will open up Iran, strengthen its middle class and put the regime on a less aggressive path. In the last two decades, Tehran has moderated its policies only under pressure; resuming its aggression when that pressure is relieved...  Those who hoped Rouhani's victory would mean an end to Ahmadinejad's rampant human rights violations were sorely disappointed. Under his watch, Iran has executed Iranians at a much higher rate than under his hardline predecessor. The ayatollahs even revived the long abandoned punishments of amputation for thieves. Last week, Iran tried to assassinate the leaders of two major Kurd opposition groups and executed a political prisoner convicted of 'waging war against God' - the Islamic Republic's equivalence of Stalin-era deviance from Marxist doctrine. The bottom line for the West: Abandoning Iranian dissidents to appease Tehran is bad policy. The nuclear deal will not encourage the regime to mend its ways. To the contrary, it feels vindicated in its actions by the flow of dignitaries and foreign delegations coming to Iran to hail the deal. It is only by supporting and empowering Iran's civil society and its pro-democracy movement that meaningful change will ever happen. It is more vital than ever that the West pressure the regime on the human-rights front and wield coercive diplomacy and human rights' sanctions to shield its civil society from the regime's oppression." http://t.uani.com/1J07dq7           Eye on Iran is a periodic news summary from United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) a program of the American Coalition Against Nuclear Iran, Inc., a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Eye on Iran is not intended as a comprehensive media clips summary but rather a selection of media elements with discreet analysis in a PDA friendly format. For more information please email Press@UnitedAgainstNuclearIran.com United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) is a non-partisan, broad-based coalition that is united in a commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons.  UANI is an issue-based coalition in which each coalition member will have its own interests as well as the collective goal of advancing an Iran free of nuclear weapons.