|
Trump
pursuing options as part of a nuclear deal with Iran isn’t
“outrageous.” The Senate Democratic leader shouldn’t get in the
president’s way.
by Bill Scher
Donald Trump is spending most of his time as president
destabilizing the global economy, lining his pockets, arresting,
detaining, and deporting immigrants without due process, destroying the
public health system, bowing to dictators, and undermining democracy.
But he is trying to do one good thing: resurrect a nuclear deal with
Iran.
Yes,
Trump is hypocritically trying to revive a deal that Barack Obama
forged, Iran and five other nations signed, and that the 45th president
pettily torched, which offered the best chance of keeping Tehran from
getting a nuclear weapon. Nevertheless, whatever the 47th president’s
motivations, removing a destabilizing atomic threat in the Middle East
is an unequivocal good. Democrats, as longtime diplomacy proponents,
should welcome Trump’s belated embrace of their approach.
Which is why Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s attack on Trump’s Iran negotiating strategy is terrible.
On Monday, Axios reported:
The
nuclear deal proposal the U.S. gave Iran on Saturday would allow
limited low-level uranium enrichment on Iranian soil for a
to-be-determined period of time, Axios has learned, contradicting public
statements from top officials
…White
House envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have said
publicly that the U.S. will not allow Iran to enrich uranium and will
demand the full dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear facilities. The secret
proposal shows far more flexibility on both points …Iran has
consistently said it won’t sign any deal that bans enrichment for
civilian purposes—a red line that is irreconcilable with the U.S. public
posture. But the proposal …would seem to offer a clearer path to a
deal.
Schumer quickly posted a video on social media saying:
When
it comes to negotiating with the terrorist government of Iran, Trump’s
all over the lot. One day, he sounds tough. The next day, he’s backing
off. And now, all of a sudden, we find out that Witkoff and Rubio are
negotiating a secret side deal with Iran.
What
kind of bull is this? They’re going to sound tough in public and then
have a side deal that lets Iran get away with everything? That’s
outrageous. We need to make that side deal public. Any side deal should
be before Congress and, most importantly, the American people. If TACO
Trump is already folding, the American public should know about it. No
side deals.
What’s
outrageous is Schumer’s statement. Trump sounded tough, then offered a
concession? That’s not being “all over the lot.” That’s negotiating.
Is
Trump offering “a side deal that lets Iran get away with everything”?
That’s not what Axios reported. At issue was a specified “limited
low-level uranium enrichment on Iranian soil for a to-be-determined
period of time.” A subsequent report from The New York Times provided more details:
The
Trump administration is proposing an arrangement that would allow Iran
to continue enriching uranium at low levels while the United States and
other countries work out a more detailed plan intended to block Iran’s
path to a nuclear weapon but give it access to fuel for new nuclear
power plants.
The
proposal amounts to a diplomatic bridge, intended to maneuver beyond
the current situation, in which Iran is rapidly producing
near-bomb-grade uranium, to reach the U.S. goal of Iran enriching no
uranium at all on its soil. But it is far from clear that the Iranians
will go along.
Under
the proposal, the United States would facilitate the building of
nuclear power reactors for Iran and negotiate the construction of
enrichment facilities managed by a consortium of regional countries.
Once Iran began receiving any benefits from those promises, it would
have to stop all enrichment in the country.
This
in no way constitutes “Iran getting away with everything.” It’s another
way of achieving what the Obama agreement allowed—low-level uranium
enrichment, short of weapons-grade, on Iranian soil, subject to
international inspections. Moreover, Iran’s Supreme Leader on Wednesday rejected the offer,
seemingly insisting on enrichment on Iranian soil, posting on X, “To
the American side and others we say: Why are you interfering and trying
to say whether Iran should have uranium enrichment or not? That’s none
of your business.”
Before Iran’s response, Schumer took to the Senate floor on Tuesday to pressure the Trump administration to reveal more about their offer:
The
administration must clarify what they might be hiding from the American
people in this secret side deal. Steve Witkoff and those negotiating
this deal should testify before Congress and answer a simple question:
Is there a secret side deal that will allow the Iranian regime to
continue enriching uranium and that empowers the regime’s nefarious
activity, or not?
This
is demagoguery that’s antithetical to successful negotiating. During
sensitive diplomacy, Congress should not pressure the White House to
reveal the details of its positions. Advise and consent, says the
Constitution, but not spill the beans. Leaked details of potential
concessions can prompt the parties to dig in, making it less likely to
find common ground. Case in point: Late Monday, Trump responded to
the Axios report with an all-caps social media post, “WE WILL NOT ALLOW ANY ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM!” And the Iranian Supreme Leader followed with his rebuff.
Trump
was able to blow up Obama’s deal because Senate Republicans were never
going to provide the support necessary to ratify any legally binding
treaty, leaving Obama only with the possibility of a less firm
“executive agreement.” Schumer should be signaling as party leader that
Democrats would consider any deals, including a formal treaty, giving
Trump guidelines but not micromanaging to reach an agreement.
Bill Scher is the Politics Editor at the Washington Monthly |