AUMF needed now: Our top priority is Iran, not ISIS

During last week’s Republican presidential debate, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz called a nuclear Iran “the greatest national security threat facing America.” He was right. Unfortunately, voters would never know, judging from the short shrift accorded the subject. 

With nine candidates onstage, hopes couldn’t reasonably have been high for a deep policy dive, but the Republican debate was notable insofar as it demonstrated the degree to which the Islamic State (IS) and the refugee situation caused by the Syrian civil war have taken our eye off the much more significant long-term threat of Iranian hegemony backed by a newly legitimized nuclear program. Iran’s behavior in the past several months demonstrates the weakness of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Obama’s nuclear deal with Tehran. 

{mosads}In October, Iran test-launched a ballistic missile. Ballistic missiles, of course, have lots of household uses; in fact, Amazon is considering using them to deliver items like furniture to your house. Just kidding. They’re only used to deliver nuclear warheads. Now, the titanium-spined folks at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) have said Iran isn’t allowed to do that – in fact, just this week, the UNSC found that the October launch had been a violation of the ballistic missile ban. 

After the October launch, the United States, Britain, France and Germany took the bold action of writing a strongly worded letter to the UNSC’s Iran Sanctions Committee. It’s worth pointing out here that the U.S., Britain and France are members of that committee. 

So, to sum up, Iran violated international law to test a nuclear weapons delivery system during the final stages of implementing an international agreement over its two decades-old illegal nuclear weapons program. And we responded by sending ourselves an angry letter. 

And we learned last week that Iran launched another ballistic missile in late November. That must have been some fire-breathing letter, huh? One assumes our response to this latest infraction will be to punch ourselves in the face. 

These illegal ballistic missile tests exist in a broader context in which the regime in Tehran clearly doesn’t much concern itself with treaty obligations, agreements, international law, or the Merriam-Webster definition of the word “honest.” That context also includes trips to Russia by Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Commander Qassem Soleimani – while Congress was still considering the JCPOA – to negotiate purchase of the S-300 air defense missile system (which was a material violation of the JCPOA and which we ignored). The context further includes Iran’s failure to fully disclose to the UN nuclear agency all military dimensions of its previous nuclear work (another material violation of the JCPOA, also ignored). It also includes a July incident in which an Iranian warship operating in the Gulf of Aden pointed its deck guns at a U.S. helicopter. It includes the September capture by Saudi forces of a massive shipment of Iranian weapons headed for the Houthi rebels in Yemen. And it includes Iran’s continued arming of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, Lebanese terror group Hezbollah, and the Hamas terror junta in Gaza. 

And that’s even before the JCPOA goes into full effect, Iran gets a windfall of $150 billion in unfrozen assets, and European companies rush in to sign contracts. We’re already ignoring Iranian violations of the deal. Does anyone seriously believe that’s going to change? 

While the danger from IS is real, Americans need to keep the terror group in proper perspective. A week ago, the Financial Times reported that IS brings in about $80 million per month. $960 million per year may sound like a lot of money, but as the gross domestic product of a country – which IS purports to be – it ranks them in the same neighborhood as noted economic and military superpower Guinea-Bissau. IS has no industrial production capacity whatsoever and an army of lightly armed guys in trucks. They are vicious, determined, and must be dealt with. But they are not a long-term existential threat to international peace and security. Iran is. 

Iran is already proving – as too many of us predicted – that they have no intention of keeping to the terms of the JCPOA. The Obama administration is already proving – as too many of us suspected – that its priority is the maintenance of the illusion of a deal rather than achievement of the agreement’s stated objective. And the American people are distracted by the actual, but far less catastrophic, threat of terrorism. 

In April, I wrote about the emerging – but not yet finalized – Iran deal in which I concluded: 

Members of Congress, Republican and Democrat, should stop fighting the last war of either impeding or requiring oversight over a deal. Instead, they should pass an Authorization for Use of Military Force and force the president to take a position on it. 

No one who has been watching this administration believes President Obama has the will to use military force against Iran. But Congress passing and the president signing an AUMF would signal the credibility of the president’s claim that “all options” remain on the table and would force candidates for the presidency and voters to focus on Iran policy in a way that will confer on the next occupant of the White House a mandate to act. Congress should pass an AUMF immediately. 

Greenberg is an ordained Reform rabbi and the senior vice president of the Haym Salomon Center. A former staffer at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, you can follow him @JGreenbergSez.