Action against Iran that Democrats support
How should the United States respond to the proliferation of deadly roadside explosives in Iraq manufactured and developed in Iran?I think Morris is right on this. If the Congressional majority is a veto proof that will give the President cover to clamp down on the Euros who have been Iran wimps all along. The administration has been very effective with its banking crackdown on the Tehran regime and this would be additional pressure. The President can even get credit for being bipartisan. Woo-hoo!
And how to react to the capture by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard of 15 British Marines and sailors in Iraqi territorial waters?
What should we do about Iran’s continued refusal to halt its nuclear enrichment program even in the face of twice-imposed United Nations sanctions?
We should pass — and the president should sign — the Dodd-Lantos bill mandating economic sanctions on any foreign company that aids Iran’s energy industry. Domestic companies are already prohibited from such investments.
This Democratic bill, cosponsored by Sen. Chris Dodd (Conn.) and Rep. Tom Lantos (Calif.), is a bold piece of legislation that strikes at the core of Iranian vulnerability.
And, in a singular act of courage and dedication to principle, Republican presidential candidate Congressman Duncan Hunter (Calif.) has added his name to the legislation as a cosponsor. Hunter’s action is particularly admirable since the bill is designed to force the Bush administration to impose sanctions passed in the 1990s but disregarded by both presidents, Clinton and Bush, ever since.
The Dodd-Lantos bill would omit the national security waiver Clinton used twice to stop the sanctions from taking effect. The waiver was inserted at the insistence of then-National Security Advisor Sandy Berger (before he started stealing documents in his socks). For his part, President Bush has not even waived the law, he just hasn’t applied it at all.
The original sanctions legislation provided a variety of punishments that the president had to impose on foreign companies that invest in Iran’s oil and gas industries. These ranged from barring their participation in underwriting Treasury issues to prohibiting them from receiving export-import financing, as well as certain government contracts. The sanctions were so effective that they triggered howls of outrage from European governments that objected to what they called “extraterritorial” assertions of American power.
Presumably neither Bush nor Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice wants to rekindle the war of words with European governments, so they have not applied the sanctions that remain on the books. They probably worry that to do so would shatter Western unity in the face of Iranian aggression and the threat of nuclear-weapons development.
But as Dodd, Lantos, and Hunter all realize, once the president and the secretary of state are stripped of the ability to waive the sanctions, they become a potent tool to stop European companies like Royal Dutch Shell, BNP, Total and Repsol from helping Iran tap its massive oil and gas reserves. The Bush administration people can plead that Congress is forcing their hand and foreign governments would just have to live with the consequences. Like the old Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which forced presidents to deal harshly with the Soviet Union as long as it barred Jewish emigration, the Dodd-Lantos bill would be a very effective tool in bringing Iran to heel.