Reject the deal and Iran will return to the table

As Congress returns to Washington following the August recess, members are particularly focused on the continued unraveling of President Obama’s misguided nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran. After thoroughly reviewing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and weighing various claims made by the Obama administration and other P5+1 negotiators, it is clear that Obama’s deal with Iran is deeply flawed and risks the safety and security of the United States and its allies. 

Not only does Obama’s nuclear deal allow Iran to maintain a functioning nuclear program and reserve production capability, this deal makes several additional concessions that will only further destabilize an already volatile Middle East region. 

{mosads}In July, Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.) and I met with former P5+1 negotiator, Jacques Audibert. Shortly after the meeting, Sanchez spoke with Bloomberg stating, “He [Audibert] basically said, if Congress votes this down, there will be some saber-rattling and some chaos for a year or two, but in the end nothing will change and Iran will come back to the table to negotiate again and that would be to our advantage.” 

Reps. Paul Cook (R-Calif.) and Tom Marino (R-Pa.) and myself were in the meeting and have all publicly confirmed Sanchez’s account. 

While most Americans continue to reject the deal, the Obama administration continues to draw on fear and make claims that chaos would ensue if Congress rejects the JCPOA. I strongly disagree with the administration’s claims and firmly believe that Iran would be forced to eventually return to the negotiating table should Congress reject the current deal. 

In agreeing to the JCPOA, Iran was able to negotiate a lifting of the ban on certain conventional weapons. As many experts have predicted, this action will create an arms race and lead to the further proliferation of advanced weapons in the region.  

While not covered under the weapons ban, the Russian Federation has taken full advantage of Iran’s current momentum and already finalized a deal to sell it’s highly advanced S-300 missile system to Iran. The S-300 is capable of destroying targets at long ranges and provides even greater capability than the SA-11 system linked to the deaths of 298 innocent civilians onboard Malaysian Airlines Flight 17. If allowed to continue, there is no telling what sort of advanced weapons systems Iran will procure and employ against the U.S. and its partners. 

Despite being included on the State Department’s own State Sponsor of Terrorism list since 1984, Iran has essentially been granted a pardon and allowed to continue to covertly provide deadly weapons to terror organizations in the region such as Hezbollah. Equally troubling in all of this is the fact that Iran will now be allowed to continue its pursuit of ballistic missile technologies, which will place the United States and its allies around the world directly in harm’s way. The very fact that such a clause regarding ballistic missile technology exists in the JCPOA completely discredits Iran and any notion that its nuclear program exists for non-military purposes. 

When announcing the finalized JCPOA at the White House, Obama told the American people that this deal was built on verification rather than trust. While this deal was being negotiated, I had the opportunity to meet directly with a senior International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) official assigned to the Iran Task Force. That official made clear that despite Obama’s assertions, the IAEA will remain unable to verify all locations associated with Iran’s nuclear program. 

The “anywhere, anytime access” for inspection purposes that Secretary of Energy Moniz said would be a part of the agreement as recently as April, quickly deteriorated to “where necessary, when necessary” when Obama unveiled the plan. Sadly, when reading the text of the agreement, however, even verification “when necessary” seems implausible. The convoluted procedure to allow IAEA inspectors access to suspected locations that may be in violation of the agreement can take up to 24 days or more depending on procedural hurdles, during which time we are supposed to trust that the Iranians are being forthcoming.

Nothing in Iran’s history, or their recent actions should lead us to believe that trusting them is in the best interest of regional stability or our own national security. Recently leaked documents concerning the suspected nuclear military site at Parchin, uncovered just weeks after the JCPOA was set in place, warned of significant deviations from traditional verification standards and broader Iranian influence in the process than should be accepted. This deal does not make our nation safer, it does not make the Middle East safer and it rewards Iran for supporting organizations that continue to destabilize the region. 

Turner has represented Ohio’s 10^th Congressional District since 2003. He sits on the Armed Services; the Intelligence; and the Oversight and Government Reform committees.