GOP weighs next move on Iran

Senate Republicans are debating their next move on Iran now that a sanctions bill opposed by President Obama has passed out of committee.

Some in the GOP conference are pushing Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to bring the sanctions bill up for a vote immediately, arguing Democrats should be forced to go on record as supporting Obama’s nuclear diplomacy.

{mosads}“I think it has been heartbreaking to see how few Democrats, even to this day, are willing to stand up to the Obama administration when it comes to the threat of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons capability,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who is pushing a sanctions vote, said earlier this week.

But other Republicans are urging a more cautious approach, with some suggesting they should prioritize legislation that would give Congress veto power over any deal.

“My priority … is congressional approval, but that’s an ongoing discussion within the conference,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the chairman of Senate Armed Services Committee.

The Senate Banking Committee on Thursday approved legislation co-authored by Sens. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) that would impose a new round of sanctions on Iran’s economy if diplomacy comes up short. Six Democrats on the committee voted for the measure.

While 10 Senate Democrats are on record as supporting the sanctions bill, they have promised not to vote for it on the floor before March 24.

That’s the date that international negotiators have set for reaching a framework on dismantling Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for easing economic sanctions.

The White House maintains that passing sanctions legislation now would disrupt the talks, splinter Western negotiators and put the U.S. on the path to military conflict. Obama personally lobbied senators in an attempt to keep the sanctions bill from receiving a vote.

“Additional sanctions on Iran at this time would undermine international unity and set back our chances for a diplomatic solution,” Obama said at a press conference earlier this month with British Prime Minister David Cameron.

The talks over Iran’s nuclear program include China, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, in addition to the United States.

Under an interim deal reached in November 2013, Iran agreed to freeze parts of its nuclear program, including the installation of centrifuges used to enrich uranium, in return for the easing of economic sanctions. Since then, diplomats have been trying without success to strike a final accord, missing two self-imposed deadlines.

While Obama has made overtures to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, he has pinned the chances of a deal at “less than 50-50.” The biggest sticking point is likely that Iran demands the right to enrich uranium for nuclear power.

With time rapidly running out in the talks, some Republicans have indicated they are willing to let the process play out.

“I think voting on it after March 24th is a good thing to do,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

Corker has written legislation that would let Congress weigh in on any final nuclear deal with Iran in an up-or-down vote.

In addition to McCain, several Republicans signaled Thursday that they are leaning toward support for Corker’s legislation.

“We ought to vote on whether or not Congress has to approve any final agreement and I hope that vote occurs sooner,” said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.).

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said lawmakers must “pursue what happens if they walk away and what happens if they want to cheat before March 24th.”

However, he said, the administration could “just keep it really simple and say when the deal is over let’s treat it like a 123 agreement” — named for a passage in federal law that provides for international atomic cooperation pacts.

“Bring it to the Congress for our vote and our approval,” Graham said. “I could live with that in lieu of sanctions if I knew that was what we were going to do.”

But other Republicans senators indicated they wouldn’t be satisfied with anything less than a sanctions threat.

“Sooner is going to be better,” said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.). “Right now is when we need it; as time goes by that is interpreted by our friends and enemies around the world as hesitation. Do we really want to do that? Are negotiations going well? No, they’re not going well and we want to go ahead and do the sanctions.”

“Time is not in our favor, time is in the favor of those individuals who don’t want sanctions to start with,” Inhofe said. “We’ve got a lot of them in the Senate and the White House, too.”

—Kristina Wong contributed.