The Iran Nuke Deal

Admittedly, I haven't been following the capitulations negotiations on the Iran nuclear deal with rapt attention.  But I do watch the news.  And not surprisingly, I'm not impressed by what our negotiators have accomplished.

First of all, as with many Americans who are not part of the Star Chamber inner circle of this administration, I do not know for sure what's in the agreement.  I'm sure this is by design for a couple of reasons.  To begin, to ape what Nancy Pelosi infamously declared about Obamacare, we need to agree to it to find out what's in it.  This administration seems to feel that the best approach to governing is akin to shooting first and asking questions later which is antithetical to our deliberative style of government.  I believe that is more likely this time because, first, the President is confronted with a Congress that he no longer controls and, second, he is trying to couch the agreement as something that doesn't require Congressional approval.

Under the Constitution, certain kind of treaties require two-thirds concurrence by the Senate.  Mr. Obama rightfully fears he would never get that approval, given the way he's handled Republicans with his approach to bipartisanship (which means, you agree with me or else).  Of course, there are different kind of agreements, or treaties, and the Hair-Splitter-In-Chief is trying to claim that this is an Executive Agreement that doesn't require Congressional approval.  The only problem with that approach is that Congress already put in place sanctions that would, were this agreement to be binding, would undo those sanctions without Congressional approval.

Faced with a testy legislative body, last week the White House agreed to give the Senate thirty days to review and pass the agreement...once it's reduced to writing.  That's another interesting part of the story.

Since nothing was reduced to writing, we don't know for sure what the agreement is supposed to be. Interestingly, Washington and Tehran disagree, apparently, on an essential term in the agreement, that of the timing of the lifting of sanctions.  Washington claims that they will be phased in gradually, while Tehran says that they are to be lifted immediately.  How there can be an agreement when one of the crucial elements of the agreement isn't even agreed upon makes one wonder.

Then there's the whole Death to America/Death to Israel facet, where our opposites continue to chant the former and pledge the latter.  How can one negotiate with an opponent who is trying to liquidate its opposite?

The Russians then muddied the waters this past week, finally allowing an agreement reached in 2007 to supply advanced anti-aircraft defense systems to Iran to go through.  As a form of realpolitik, this makes sense:  Although none of the rhetoric directed at the West has been directed at the Russians, with former Soviet territories largely populated by Muslims, and with a nuclear Iran sitting on its southern border, it makes little sense to allow Iran to get nukes.  Then again, giving it the capacity to defend itself against air attacks would seem to be counterintuitive to that rationale, my suspicion is that there's something underhanded in approving the deal at this late date.

Finally, there's the tangled, complicated real world situation in the Middle East.  As I understand the way things are right now, Iranian Shi'ite militia are helping American-trained and -equipped Iraqi forces combat ISIS forces that American warplanes bomb while Iranian-backed Yemenis have overthrown the American-backed regime, which has prompted the Saudis to bomb Sana'a.  That makes for tremendously strange bedfellows indeed.  It also makes for a hopelessly confused backdrop for a putative agreement coming from an administration this is as transparent as mud.

Is it any wonder we're not respected or feared anymore?

(c) 2015 The Truxton Spangler Chronicles