Monday, March 9, 2015

President Obama Accuses U.S. Senate Republicans Of Interfering In His Negotiations With Iran



BBC: Obama mocks Republican letter to Iran over nuclear talks

US President Barack Obama has criticised a letter from Republican senators to Iran, accusing them of "interfering" in ongoing nuclear talks.

He said the 47 senators made an "unusual coalition" with Iran's hard-line religious leaders.

The letter reminds Iran that any deal is just an executive agreement unless it gets congressional approval.

Talks on Iran's nuclear programme are at a critical stage, with an outline agreement due on 31 March.

WNU Editor: The U.S. media is on board with the White House in criticizing this open letter from the U.S. Republicans to the Iranian leadership (see above video). What's my take .... as an outside observer, I find it interesting that President Obama and the Democrat party (coupled with much of the U.S. main stream media) appear to be more worked up, agitated, and angry at the Republican Party than at Iran.

More News On White House And Democrat Reaction To The U.S. Senate Republican Letter To The Iranian Leadership

Republicans Draw White House Ire for Warning to Iran -- Time
Obama, Iranian official slam GOP letter on deal -- CNN
President Obama Angry with Senate GOP Over Letter to Iran, Claims It Undermines Negotiation Talks -- IJReview
Obama: Some Republicans making "common cause" with Iran -- EFE
Joe Biden: GOP senators’ Iran letter ‘offends me’ -- MSNBC
Joe Biden: Republicans letter on Iran sends 'dangerous signal' to friends -- The Telegraph
Text of Joe Biden’s Statement on Senators’ Letter to Iran’s Leaders -- WSJ
GOP senators send letter to Iran in attempt to undermine nuclear deal; Biden calls it ‘false’ and ‘dangerous’ -- PBS/AP

1 comment:

Trevor Pyle said...

Here's my issue with what they did.
First of all, coupled with the Netanyahu speech, they have repeatedly and deliberately undercut the President's efforts. This is contrary to the concept of the President as Chief of State and Head of Government. It also seriously undercuts the concept of strategic ambiguity.
"No matter what sort of deal Obama strikes with you, we aren't going to approve it unless you totally accede to our demands. Otherwise it's war" This is what Congress is saying to Iran.
In what world is this a way to negotiate? You're setting up them up to fail before things have a chance to fail.

I don't care if you're absolutely convinced that they are going to get nuclear weapons capability, this type of language only makes that course of action more inevitable. It removes any sort of incentive to actually do what you want them to do.

So, basically, we are making the same mistakes we made in 2002-2003. We are rushing towards war based on evidence that is not certain, and we are not going to accept anything they say at face value because we are certain that our information is true.

Here's an idea: give them enough rope to hang themselves. Negotiate and tell them this: Any nuclear explosion on Israeli or Saudi soil will be seen as an attack by Iran on the United States, and we will retaliate in full against the Iranian government. But until that time, we are going to treat you like a sovereign nation with your own intrests.
Trust has to start somewhere. We give them a chance and incentives to change their behavior, while leaving open the option of pounding the hell out of them if they don't do what we want.

Unless of course, you just want to destroy their government and are using this an excuse. Now, if that's the case, then just admit it. Own it.