Click here to subscribe today or Login.
In his capacity as “contributing columnist,” U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey recently explained his opposition to a nuclear deal recently negotiated by the Obama administration — and other major world powers — with the government of Iran. The purpose of that agreement is to forestall Iranian development of nuclear weapons.
Of course he’s opposed to the nuclear deal! He has mindlessly opposed virtually everything Obama has ever done: no reason the Iranian treaty should be any different.
Toomey says he has read the terms of the deal, consulted experts and been briefed by experts. Let’s take him at his word and be thankful for his diligent research, but I doubt it makes a difference. The Republican leadership in the Senate and House announced opposition to the Iran deal – before it was even available to be read. Given that Toomey votes lockstep with that leadership virtually all of the time, I doubt his self-styled careful analysis made any difference.
Toomey and others opposed to the agreement huff and puff, but offer no detailed, plausible alternative – as Obama has challenged them to do – largely because there isn’t one. Toomey certainly hasn’t presented one.
Maybe he should pay attention to the 29 U.S. nuclear physicists, including Nobel laureates and makers of nuclear weapons, who have praised the deal as “innovative” and stringent.” Or the many leading arms control experts who favor the deal Or the three dozen retired generals and admirals have also concluded the agreement is the best way to curb Iranian nuclear ambitions – pointing out that the U.S. would stand zero chance of getting international support for military action unless we first give diplomacy a chance.
Sen. Toomey says that he favors stringent sanctions, but rejecting the deal makes such sanctions impossible. This agreement is not bilateral between the U.S. and Iran. Other major economic powers such as China, Russia, Germany and France have already approved the treaty, as has the United Nations. This is important because economic sanctions by the U.S. alone simply won’t work – unilateral sanctions never do.
Without the cooperation of other world economic powers, much of the weight of world sanctions will be lifted from Iranian shoulders, leaving it free to develop its nuclear program to the point where it can produce weapons. Then what? Military action?
If Toomey thinks military strikes are a better option than a negotiated treaty, then he has learned nothing at all from the quagmire in Iraq. He also needs to say so. Mouthing implausible nonsense about stronger sanctions and a better deal might be good domestic politics, but rejecting this deal is both dangerous and irresponsible.
John Wills
Rice Township