Shelby: Obama too soft on Iran, US should further sanction 'world’s foremost sponsor of terrorism'

WASHINGTON — Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), Chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs committee, delivered remarks to the full committee Tuesday morning stressing the importance of continuing sanctions on Iran.

Today, we will hear from our witnesses on the role that economic sanctions have played in influencing Iran’s illegal nuclear program.

Iran has long been a serious threat to U.S. national security interests. It is the world’s foremost sponsor of terrorism, it supports radical regimes, it destabilizes its neighbors, and it continues to pose a threat to our ally, Israel.

The Iranian nuclear program has worried lawmakers for the last decade, as the government has obtained more advanced nuclear technology many experts believe could be used for producing weapons. Reports of the talks between Iran and the Obama administration hint that Iran’s leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the Iranian Parliament will not be satisfied unless the country’s ability to work toward building a nuclear arsenal is left intact.

In his statement, Sen. Shelby warned that Iran is the “destabilizing force in the region” that many reports say was “a major backer of the rebels in [the] uprising” that led to the resignation of Yemen’s entire government earlier this month.

Since the mid-’80s, Iran has been pursuing capabilities that would enable it to build nuclear weapons. As a result, the United States has led efforts to impose strong, and progressively more stringent, sanctions against Iran under both Democrat and Republican Administrations.

Over the past few decades, a bipartisan consensus has emerged that tough sanctions are essential in order to persuade Iran to moderate its reckless behavior. Consequently, sanctions have succeeded where diplomatic efforts have repeatedly failed to bring Iran to the negotiating table.

After many rounds of talks, however, it is not at all clear that the existing sanctions regime will produce a viable nuclear deal that will protect U.S. national security interests.

Sen. Shelby called the current, softer Obama administration approach with Iran “insufficient.”

The Obama administration is concerned that keeping sanctions on the table could cause Iran to walk away from negotiations. Shelby avidly disagreed, adding that repercussions for Iran not cooperating should be “clearly defined in statute.”

The President and other officials have said that Congress should not interfere, that a deal is close, that the situation is delicate, and that an attempt to legislate any additional sanctions may give Iran an excuse to walk away from the negotiating table.

It has been my experience that if a party is negotiating in good faith and with the intent to reach an agreement, they will seek common ground, not an excuse to walk away.

If Iran is looking for a way out, I believe they never intended to ever reach an agreement in the first place. The fact that the current negotiation has already been extended twice is further evidence of their recalcitrance.

There is now a growing bipartisan consensus that not only does Congress have a role to play in ensuring that Iran does not back away, but it also has a responsibility in this regard.