Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
A pair of prominent Senate Republicans who support former President Donald Trump assert that any enduring agreement concerning Iran’s nuclear program should receive congressional approval, ideally through a two-thirds majority treaty vote.
Achieving such a majority in the Senate for treaty ratification hinges on Iran meeting several stringent demands. GOP lawmakers emphasize that this includes eliminating all of its enriched uranium and centrifuges, dismantling its ballistic missile program, and halting all support for terrorist organizations throughout the Middle East.
Senator Tom Cotton, Republican from Arkansas, stated that if a truly durable agreement is desired, it should come before the Senate for a treaty vote. He remarked in response to a question from Fox News Digital that a treaty offers the most reliable form of agreement.
Cotton added that the weakness of the deal negotiated by President Obama stemmed from not requiring congressional approval. He pointed out that an understanding between a sitting U.S. president and a foreign leader can easily be reversed by future administrations, referencing how President Trump terminated the agreement seven years ago.
In 2015, Cotton led an initiative where Senate Republicans sent an open letter to Iranian leaders. This letter indicated that any nuclear agreement lacking congressional approval could be reversed by subsequent administrations, a move many perceived as an attempt to disrupt then-President Obama’s negotiations.
Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican from South Carolina, also reinforced the need for congressional oversight, asserting that any treaty must, at the very least, align with the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, also known as INARA. This legislation, passed in 2015 with strong bipartisan backing, guarantees Congress the opportunity to review any agreements made with Tehran.
Graham mentioned he had informed Secretary of State Marco Rubio that achieving the necessary 67 votes to ratify any treaty agreement could only be possible if Iran fully dismantles its nuclear capabilities, missile programs, and terrorist affiliations.
The senators drew comparisons between potential Iran agreements and the 123 agreements that govern U.S. civil nuclear cooperation with other nations. These agreements demand rigorous safeguards to avert the development of nuclear weapons.
Cotton pointed out that it is customary for Congress, not just the Senate, to enact legislation that backs these 123 agreements, suggesting that any substantial deal with Iran should undergo similar legislative scrutiny.
After introducing a resolution that outlines acceptable terms for an agreement with Iran, Cotton and Graham discussed their vision for the negotiations, which includes an absolute end to uranium enrichment.
Data from the International Atomic Energy Agency indicates that Iran has accumulated enough highly enriched uranium to potentially construct several nuclear weapons if it so chooses. Nevertheless, U.S. intelligence reports assert that Iran has not yet decided to pursue weaponization.
Increasingly, both U.S. and Israeli officials have issued stark warnings regarding Iran’s regime. Former President Trump has made it clear that should negotiations falter, the U.S. will consider direct military action aimed at impeding Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Graham noted that the Iranian regime faces a pressing timeline, suggesting the government only has “weeks” to agree to a comprehensive deal.
We are not discussing lengthy negotiations, the South Carolina senator emphasized. The timeframe is measured in weeks rather than months or years. The looming threat of an Iranian breakout is significant, and Israel’s urgent wish to resolve this situation also weighs heavily.
In summary, the insistence by GOP senators on congressional approval for any potential Iran nuclear deal marks a critical juncture in U.S. foreign policy dealings with Tehran. This call for oversight underlines a broader desire among some lawmakers to ensure that any agreement with Iran holds substantial and lasting weight, mirroring past legislative frameworks that governed nuclear cooperation.
