Choice of Diplomacy over warfare
Washington,
D.C. – Congressman
Jim Langevin (D-RI), a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and the
House Committee on Homeland Security, released the following statement in
support of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action regarding Iran’s nuclear
program:
“In
July, the P5+1 announced the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), a
landmark agreement with the goal of keeping a nuclear weapon out of the hands
of Iran. The plan we are presented with is not the agreement I would have
negotiated, and I had hoped the P5+1 would be able to use its significant
leverage to elicit additional concessions from the Iranian regime.
"However, I am deeply appreciative of the tremendous efforts of President
Obama, Secretary Kerry, Secretary Moniz and the rest of the U.S. negotiating
team. And while no plan of this nature could ever be without flaws or risk, I
believe that this agreement, carefully crafted with our negotiating partners
and allies, presents the best chance to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions and
protect the security of the United States and our allies in the Middle East and
around the world. That is why I have decided to support the JCPOA.
“Among all of the language in the agreement and its
annexes, the preamble is both critically important and crystal clear when it
states that ‘Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek,
develop or acquire any nuclear weapons’ – and we will hold Iran to it.
"A
nuclear-armed Iran poses an unacceptable threat, and regardless of our
positions or perspectives on the deal, preventing this threat is a goal shared
by all. Iran and its nuclear ambitions pose a threat to the security of the
United States, to the stability of an already-at-risk Middle East, and to
Israel in particular.
“Over the past eight weeks, I have consulted with
nuclear experts, questioned military leaders and members of the negotiating
team, read and re-read the agreement and its classified and unclassified
annexes, discussed the deal and its ramifications with knowledgeable analysts,
and listened closely to the concerns of my constituents on both sides of the
issue.
"I understand and respect both perspectives, and I am incredibly grateful
to all of the Rhode Islanders who reached out to my office to share their
thoughts or attended my Town Hall meetings to voice their concerns. The future
safety of my constituents and the country has consistently been at the
forefront of my mind when considering this agreement, and it will remain so as
implementation and enforcement efforts begin.
“Without question, this has been one of
the most difficult decisions I have ever been called upon to make as an elected
official. I compare it to my 2002 vote against the Iraq War. I cast that vote,
an unpopular one at the time, because I felt strongly in my heart that acting
in concert with the international community should always be our first choice
and that war should always be a last resort. I voted to protect my
constituents, my state and my country. I voted for a more secure, peaceful
future.
“It is with those same priorities in
mind that today I offer my
support for the Iran nuclear agreement.
“This agreement would give international inspectors
unprecedented access to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and would establish
rigorous procedures for monitoring and verification. That verification process,
and its robust system of checks and balances, was a critical precondition of my
support for any deal. Let me be clear: I do not trust Iran. But I also believe
after careful consideration that this deal will empower the P5+1 to fully
enforce its provisions and catch Iran if they cheat.
"Crucially, the agreement
preserves America’s power to snap back sanctions in whole or in part if Iran
fails to comply, and this authority will not be subject to a veto by China,
Russia, or the United Nations. As the President has stated, ‘If at any time the
United States believes that Iran has failed to meet its commitments, no other
state can block our ability to snap back those multilateral sanctions… [W]e
also enjoy a range of other, more incremental options.’
“If Iran violates the agreement in any way, the
increased monitoring provided under the deal will allow us to know quickly and
act decisively. Conversely, if the United States were to abandon this
agreement, despite the full support of the United Kingdom, China, France,
Russia and Germany, Iran’s nuclear ambitions could go unchecked. This deal is
not about trust; it is about verification and enforcement.
“Of course, while we can commit ourselves to
policing Iran’s behavior under the agreement, and hope for and enforce
compliance, the fact remains that such measures may not be enough. Despite
all of the uncertain consequences that it would entail, military action may
someday prove necessary. The President has made clear publicly, and has
reiterated to me personally, that nothing in the JCPOA removes that, or any,
option from the table, nor does the agreement militarily constrain the United
States in any way.
"Should Iran’s future actions lead us to conclude that a
military response is our only remaining option, we will be able to execute that
action with the knowledge that we have provided the Iranian regime with every
possible opportunity to pursue a diplomatic resolution to this issue and
demonstrate the professed peaceful nature of its nuclear program. We will have
the moral authority to act, and we will be much more likely have the support of
the international community in so doing.
“Like many of my constituents, I still have
remaining and significant concerns with the agreement. I am deeply
troubled by Iran’s continuing support for terrorism, and by the potential for
additional funding to be directed to these malign efforts once nuclear-related
sanctions are lifted. I would very much have liked to see this
issue addressed as part of the agreement, but absent that, it clearly must be a
priority for us to address through other means moving forward.
"I also have
grave concerns about the conventional weapons sales permitted after several
years under the agreement, the nuclear materials and activities allowed in its
final years, and most especially about the enrichment capability Iran will
possess in fifteen years when restrictions expire. Finally, based on the
Iranian regime’s history of behavior, I am worried about opportunities that
might exist for Iran to skirt the requirements of the agreement in the nearer
term.
“For these reasons and more, I am deeply committed
to working with my colleagues and the Administration to exercise rigorous
oversight of the plan’s implementation, leave no doubt that cheating will
result in severe repercussions, and provide whatever tools may be necessary to
ensure that Iran’s activities do not threaten the security of our own citizens
or our allies in the region. In particular, we must make sure that Israel is
provided with the technology, intelligence, and military capabilities required
to ensure their qualitative military advantage in the region and counter any
threats they may face, including from Iran.
“This agreement is only the beginning. Its immediate
goal is to block Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, but there is significant
long-term potential for a more peaceful Middle East when the agreement is
followed up with rigorous enforcement and oversight. I am hopeful that this
first step opens new opportunities for cooperation as the United States and our
partners redouble our efforts to confront Iran’s support for terror and its
destabilizing activities in the region.
“I did not arrive at this decision easily, and I
will not stop pressing to strengthen this agreement and its enforcement. I
truly believe, however, that it represents our best chance to prevent Iran from
becoming a nuclear threat, our best chance for an international community
united in support of our interests, and our best option for peace. We must give
diplomacy a chance to work. It took years to get us to this point and our work
is far from done, but with this agreement, we take a major step forward.”
