Clinton: Nuclear deal must be backed up by pressure on Iran

WASHINGTON — Democratic presidential front-runner and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton reiterated her support for the nuclear deal signed with Iran on Wednesday morning, but emphasized that a number of steps must be taken in order to ensure that pressure remains on Tehran after the deal goes into effect. In a speech at Washington’s Brookings Institution, Clinton delineated a five-point plan that she would enact if elected president to mitigate Iran’s regional influence and ensure that Iran does not successfully cheat on its obligations under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

Clinton also reiterated her support for Israel, declaring that if elected, she would invite the prime minister of Israel to the White House during her first month in office, in order to shore up cooperation between the two states. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Barack Obama have maintained a notoriously acrimonious relationship characterized by snubs and subtle digs, and critics of both administrations have complained that the acrimony has caused damage to the alliance between Washington and Jerusalem.

The talk by the Democratic presidential candidate came in the midst of a week of frenzied mobilization in Washington ahead of anticipated Congressional votes on the Iran deal. Both the House and Senate are expected to vote late this week — or at the latest, next week, on twin resolutions of disapproval of the controversial deal. Activists and presidential hopefuls alike — including Republicans Donald Trump, Lindsey Graham, Jim Gilmore and Ted Cruz — have all flocked to the capital city to voice their opinions on the agreement before the vote. Cruz, Trump and Gilmore were all expected to speak Wednesday afternoon at a Tea Party and Zionist Organization of America-sponsored rally against the deal on Capitol Hill.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PFyvx6VpwI

Clinton voiced strong support for the nuclear deal with Iran, noting that she helped to lay the groundwork for talks with Iran when she was secretary of state during Obama’s first term in office. She told the invite-only audience that, “either we move forward on the path of diplomacy and seize this chance to block Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon, or we turn down a more dangerous path leading to a far less certain and riskier future.”

While noting that “the stakes are high and there are no simple or perfectly satisfying solutions,” Clinton also said that the current agreement “accomplishes the major goals that we set out to achieve.”

She repeated the Obama administration’s admonition that “if we walk away, our capacity to sustain and enforce sanctions will be severely diminished. We will be blamed, not the Iranians.”

At the same time, Clinton conditioned her support by adding that she “understand[s] the skepticism so many feel about Iran.”

“It’s not enough to say yes to this deal. We have to say yes… and,” she stressed.

“We will begin from day one to set the conditions so that Iran knows that it will never be able to get a nuclear weapon, not under the terms of the agreement, not after, and not ever,” Clinton emphasized. “This is not the start of some larger diplomatic opening and we shouldn’t expect that this deal will lead to broader changes in their behavior.

“My starting point will be one of distrust,” she explained. “My approach will be distrust and verify. We should anticipate that Iran will test the next president. They’ll want to see if they can bend the rules. That won’t happen if I am in the White House.”

Clinton called on the current administration to work with members of Congress to “tighten the rules” on Iran, gesturing toward legislation that is already being drafted by senators Ben Cardin and Richard Blumenthal, two Democrats who represent opposite opinions on the deal itself.

She emphasized the importance, moving forward, of both “keeping our allies on board but being willing to snap back sanctions unilaterally in place if we have to,” and of ensuring that the International Atomic Energy Agency is sufficiently funded to effectively carry out its inspection obligations under the agreement.

Clinton’s campaign emphasized the significance of a five-point plan, delineated in the speech, that she said was designed to counter “Iran’s bad behavior in the region.”

The plan includes continued and even increased military aid to Israel, as well as security guarantees to the US’s Gulf allies. It stressed building an international coalition to crack down on Iran’s proxies — including increased sanctions against Hezbollah and cracking down on Turkey and Qatar’s support for Hamas. Clinton also noted that the US — in retrospect — had responded with insufficient support for the Green Revolution of 2009 and the ensuing Iranian government crackdown, and stressed the importance of holding the regime’s feet to the fire over human rights abuses.

Within that framework, Clinton suggested that additional sanctions could be placed on Iran for its domestic human rights abuses and vowed to “vigorously enforce and strengthen US sanctions against the Iranian Revolutionary Guards for its terror activities.”

Clinton spoke specifically about Israeli concerns with the nuclear deal, as well as how she would work to strengthen the US-Israel relationship if elected.

“Israel has every reason to be alarmed by a regime that both denies its existence and seeks its destruction,” she acknowledged. “I believe in my core that Israel and America must stand side by side and I will always stand by Israel’s right to defend itself, as I always have.”

In order to reinforce that relationship, Clinton said, she would “invite the Israeli prime minister to the White House in my first month in office.”

“We have had honest disagreements on this deal, but now is the time to come together,” Clinton added. Speaking directly to the Israeli public, Clinton proclaimed that “you’ll never have to question whether we’re with you.”

Later in the address, Clinton was asked by moderator and former negotiator Martin Indyk whether she supported a “tough love” approach to Israel — an approach that he said was suggested to him by a number of Israeli colleagues.

“There is a lot of room for tough love in private behind closed doors,” Clinton responded, but added that “I just don’t think it’s particularly productive. It opens the door for everybody else to delegitimize Israel in ways that are not good just for the strength and stability of Israel but for the region.

“I don’t think [tough love] is the smartest approach.”