Thursday, January 31, 2008

Ambassador Khalilzad Gets a Slap on the Wrist for Iran Interaction

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Zalmay Khalilzad has done the unthinkable - he debated Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and Mojtaba Samare Hashemi, a top advisor to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regarding Iran’s nuclear program without the Bush administration’s authorization on a panel at the World Economic Forum in Davos. Now he is being publicly chastised for it, even though he did not veer from the administration’s position on the issue and even though he did not have any side conversations with the Iranian officials. It’s precisely this administration policy of not allowing even participation on a panel which prevents progress or breakthroughs in raising chances for a diplomatic solution on the nuclear program.

Ambassador Khalilzad accepted the invitation to the panel at the last minute and argued that the appearance “was a multi-lateral setting--in which we made our points and they made their points. There were no handshakes, no side meeting. We do it in [the UN General Assembly] and other multi-lateral settings. No change in policy."

Ambassador Khalilzad is one of the few Administration officials who has had personal contact with Iranian counterparts in the past. When he was ambassador to Afghanistan, he orchestrated Iran's help in establishing a transitional government in Kabul and he also engaged in Iran on security issues when he was in Iraq.

Here is the YouTube video of the debate. (Warning: the Iranian officials speak in Farsi and because those who participated had simultaneous translation in their earpieces, you only hear the answers of the Iranian officials in Farsi.)

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Curious Tehran Times Article on Sanctions

Tehran Times is running an article sourced to Fars News Agency which states that the International Monetary Fund announced last Saturday that despite global sanctions against Iran, the country's volume of imports has increased. I thought that such a report and findings would be pretty significant, so I searched on the IMF website to see if I could find the report. It wasn't there. I then contacted the Iran desk at the IMF and they replied that they did not know of the source that the article referred to. The latest document reporting the IMF's view on Iran's imports is the staff report for the 2006 Article IV consultation. Now I'm really curious what the source of the story is.

(UPDATE: Since posting this morning, my wonderful husband found two other publications that ran the IMF article, PressTV and Stockhouse (citing PressTV). It's kind of like the blogosphere...the more time you use the same information and cite someone else, the more likely it is to be accepted as credible.)

Here is the text of the Tehran Times article (in case the story is removed from the website):

"The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has announced on Saturday that despite the global sanctions against Iran, the country’s volume of imports has remarkably increased in 2007, Fars News Agency reported.

"Iran has imported over $40 billion worth of goods in last year, a real hike in comparison with less than $18 billion of 2002. Despite all the global pressures, the Iran’s volume of imports has doubled within the past 5 years, the report said.

"'China, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), South Korea, Russia, India, Germany, Switzerland, France, Italy, and Britain were the main exporters to Iran in 2007,' IMF said adding, China’s exports to Iran exceeded those of all European countries. The Security Council on Friday began to consider tougher sanctions on Iran that were agreed to by six major powers, including a travel ban on officials involved in the country's nuclear and missile programs, a halt to trade in sensitive nuclear technology and 'vigilance' on transactions with two banks."

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Time for New American Policy on Iran

Addressing Iran in his State of the Union speech last night, President George W. Bush reaffirmed his administration’s policy that Iran must suspend enrichment of nuclear fuel before negotiations with the U.S. can begin. Rather than presenting a bold, new vision for resolving tensions with Iran, President Bush chose to repeat lines from previous years’ speeches, highlighting Iran’s role in Iraq, support for Hezbollah and Hamas, oppression of its people and the country’s ballistic missile program. According to President Bush:


“We're also standing against the forces of extremism embodied by the regime in Tehran. Iran's rulers oppress a good and talented people. And wherever freedom advances in the Middle East, it seems the Iranian regime is there to oppose it. Iran is funding and training militia groups in Iraq, supporting Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon, and backing Hamas' efforts to undermine peace in the Holy Land. Tehran is also developing ballistic missiles of increasing range, and continues to develop its capability to enrich uranium, which could be used to create a nuclear weapon.

“Our message to the people of Iran is clear: We have no quarrel with you. We respect your traditions and your history. We look forward to the day when you have your freedom. Our message to the leaders of Iran is also clear: Verifiably suspend your nuclear enrichment, so negotiations can begin. And to rejoin the community of nations, come clean about your nuclear intentions and past actions, stop your oppression at home, cease your support for terror abroad. But above all, know this: America will confront those who threaten our troops. We will stand by our allies, and we will defend our vital interests in the Persian Gulf.”

Last week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also reiterated an offer to meet anytime anywhere if Iran suspends uranium enrichment. Secretary Rice also noted that the U.S. has no desire for permanent enmity with Iran. “We have no conflict with Iran’s people, but we have real differences with Iran’s government – from its support for terrorism, to its destabilizing policies in Iraq, to its pursuit of technology that could lead to a nuclear weapon.”

Maintaining preconditions for negotiations with Iran has prevented any forward movement on either the nuclear issue or other issues of concern to the U.S. As many notable experts, including former Congressman Lee Hamilton, have said, preconditions for negotiations with Iran are a recipe for failure.

More than anything, Iran may be remembered as the biggest missed opportunity for the Bush administration legacy. Despite an opening after September 11, 2001 when Iran was cooperating with the U.S. on Afghanistan, President Bush chose to repay Iran by labeling it part of the “axis of evil” in his 2002 State of the Union speech. The following year, in May 2003, the Bush administration dismissed out of hand an Iranian proposal delivered through an official Swiss emissary, which would have put the broad range of issues of concern on the negotiating table – from recognizing the state of Israel, to dealing with Hezbollah and Hamas, to the nuclear program.

The administration has wrongly viewed diplomacy as a reward, rather than a requirement for dealing with countries that pose a challenge to the U.S. Countries with whom we disagree are precisely the countries with whom we must be engaged in direct dialogue.

It’s time for a new American policy on Iran and we need bold leadership to pursue a more far-sighted approach. While serious concerns remain over the Government of Iran's intentions and behavior, a diplomatic solution that includes direct, unconditional, bilateral, and comprehensive talks is the only way to resolve long-standing tensions between the United States and Iran. As Winston Churchill would say, “It’s better to jaw-jaw than to war-war."

Thursday, January 24, 2008

New Regime Change Manual and a Call for Military Action

While questions remain regarding exactly how the $60 million Congress appropriated for the regime change slush fund in 2008 (aka, the so-called "democracy promotion" fund for Iran in the Foreign Operations bill) will be allocated, Freedom House, a known recipient of these funds last year has published a new manual through its Gozaar project. According to Hoder.com, the Non-Violent Struggle: 50 Crucial Points, teaches Iranians how to organize and manage urban riots to destabilize the Iranian government.

Meanwhile, Norman Podhoretz, the "father of neoconservatism," has published a new commentary arguing that the case for military action against Iran still stands.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Effectiveness of Sanctions Resolution Text

The text of Rep. Christopher Shays' (R-CT) new resolution, H.R. 5084, which would require ongoing assessments of the effectiveness of sactions against Iran is finally available. Below is the full text of the resolution.

110th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 5084

To require the Secretary of State to conduct ongoing assessments of the effectiveness of sanctions against Iran, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 18, 2008

Mr. SHAYS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, Oversight and Government Reform, Ways and Means, and Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To require the Secretary of State to conduct ongoing assessments of the effectiveness of sanctions against Iran, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ASSESSMENTS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN.

(a) Improved Data Collection and Required Assessments- The Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Defense, and the intelligence community, shall--

(1) collect, analyze, and improve data on actions by the United States Government to enforce sanctions against Iran, including data on--

(A) the number of goods seized, penalties imposed, and convictions obtained under sanctions that prohibit trade with Iran;
(B) sensitive items diverted to Iran through transshipment points;
(C) the extent to which repeat foreign violators of Iran-specific sanctions have ended their sale of sensitive items to Iran;
(D) the amount of assets frozen resulting from financial sanctions; and
(E) the extent of delays in foreign investment in Iran's energy sector;

(2) complete an overall baseline assessment of the impact and use of sanctions against Iran, including factors that impair or strengthen such sanctions;

(3) develop a framework for assessing the ongoing impact of United States sanctions against Iran and the contribution of multilateral sanctions against Iran; and

(4) conduct annual assessments of the effectiveness of sanctions against Iran in achieving United States foreign policy objectives.

(b) Report- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of State shall submit to Congress a report that contains the results of the assessments conducted under subsection (a) for the prior year.

(c) Definitions- In this Act:

(1) INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY- The term `intelligence community' has the meaning given the term in section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4)).

(2) SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN- The term `sanctions against Iran' means--

(A) multilateral sanctions against Iran under international law, including United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), and 1747 (2007); and

(B) bilateral sanctions against Iran under United States law, including--

(i) the Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-178; 50 U.S.C. 1701 note);

(ii) the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-172; 50 U.S.C. 1701 note);

(iii) the Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-484; 50 U.S.C. 1701 note); and

(iv) Executive Order No. 12959 (May 6, 1995), Executive Order No. 13059 (August 19, 1997), Executive Order No. 13224 (September 23, 2001), Executive Order No. 13382 (June 28, 2005), or any other blocking of property or prohibition on transactions with respect to Iran that is imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.).

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Sanctioning Iran Reaches New Levels

While on the one hand, the U.S. Government Accountability Office is saying we need to ask more questions about the impact of sanctions in Iran, others are evoking United Nation Security Resolutions to impose further sanctions. Take for example the University of Twente in The Netherlands, which announced last month that it will no longer allow Iranian students to study at the university. Below is the full text of the letter from the University Board posted to the university's website on December 18 explaining the decision.

The University of Twente would like to inform all Iranian applicants that unfortunately we will not be able to process your application for study programmes at all levels (Bachelor, Master and PhD degree) until further notice.

Due to the United Nations resolution and a following decision by the Dutch Ministry of Education and by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Dutch technical universities are requested to write a formal guarantee to Immigration Services (IND) that the Iranian applicant for a visa does not have access to certain specific scientific knowledge.

As this university cannot give this guarantee to the IND, applicants can apply for a visa but will finally not obtain this from Immigration Services.

Current Iranian students at the University of Twente, who already live in the Netherlands and possess a valid residence permit issued by the IND prior and who are preparing to travel across borders for the upcoming holidays should not encounter problems to do so until further notice.

Current Iranian students, who have received a letter from the IND about prolonging their residence permit, can apply without any hesitation. In case you need any help, please contact the Visa Office.

As soon as this decision is revoked the University will post a message and will immediately process pending applications.

Your sincerely,
The University Board.
University of Twente

Sunday, January 20, 2008

New Resolution on Efficacy of Iran Sanctions

Following the release of the new Government Accountability Office report on the efficacy of sanctions, Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT) introduced on January 18 a new resolution, H.R. 5084, to require the Secretary of State to conduct ongoing assessments of the effectiveness of sanctions against Iran. H.R. 5084 was referred to the House Committees on Foreign Affairs, Financial Services, Oversight and Government Reform, Ways and Means, and Agriculture. The text of the resolution is not yet available, but I will post it when it is.

Friday, January 18, 2008

Iran Diplomatic Accountability Act of 2008

On January 17, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) introduced with six other co-sponsors the "Iran Diplomatic Accountability Act of 2008." The new resolution, H.R. 5056, is the first of its kind to call for the appointment of a high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran for the purpose of easing tensions and normalizing relations between the United States and Iran. The "Findings" section of the resolution takes into account the conclusions of the most recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran. While the resolution finds that serious concerns remain over Iran's intentions regarding its nuclear program, it also concludes a diplomatic solution that includes direct, unconditional, bilateral, and comprehensive talks with the Government of Iran is the only way to resolve long-standing tensions between the United States and Iran.

Below is the full text of the H.R. 5056.

(Original Signature of Member)

110TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION

H. R. 5056

To provide for the appointment of a high-level United States representative
or special envoy for Iran for the purpose of easing tensions and normalizing
relations between the United States and Iran.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Ms. LEE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee
On January 17, 2007


A BILL


To provide for the appointment of a high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran for the purpose of easing tensions and normalizing relations between the United States and Iran.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Iran Diplomatic Accountability Act of 2008’’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) On December 3, 2007, the National Intelligence Estimate, representing the consensus view of 16 intelligence agencies, concluded that Iran had ONCE HAD a covert nuclear weapons program.

(2) The National Intelligence Estimate also found that Iran had halted its covert nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that this program remains frozen.

(3) The NIE concluded that Iran's leadership was quite sensitive to international views and wanted to avoid international confrontation and made a “cost-benefit” decision regarding whether or not to have such a program.

(4) Serious concerns still remain about the Government of Iran’s intentions and behavior with respect to the development of nuclear weapons, especially regarding its fuel enrichment program and the speed with which it might reconstitute it’s suspended nuclear weapon’s program.

(5) The United States should enlist the support of all interested parties to the region, including the IAEA, to establish a program to ensure that Iran's nuclear weapons program is terminated permanently, that it's nuclear energy program is brought fully under IAEA inspection and control, and that all diplomatic tools are utilized to achieve these objectives.

(6) Hostile official rhetoric exacerbates tensions and reinforces misunderstandings and animus between the people of the United States and Iran.

(7) A diplomatic solution that includes direct, unconditional, bilateral, and comprehensive talks with the Government of Iran is the only way to resolve long-standing tensions between the United States and Iran.


SEC. 3. APPOINTMENT OF HIGH-LEVEL U.S. REPRESENTATIVE OR SPECIAL ENVOY.


(a) APPOINTMENT.—At the earliest possible date, the President shall appoint a high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran.

(b) CRITERIA FOR APPOINTMENT.—The President shall appoint an individual under subsection (a) on the basis of the individual’s knowledge and understanding of the issues regarding Iran’s nuclear program, experience in conducting international negotiations, and ability to conduct negotiations under subsection (c) with the respect and trust of the parties involved in the negotiations.

(c) DUTIES.—The high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran shall—

(1) seek to conduct direct, unconditional, bilat16
eral negotiations with Iran for the purpose of easing tensions and normalizing relations between the United States and Iran;

(2) consult with other countries and international organizations, including countries in the region, where appropriate and when necessary to achieve the purpose set forth in paragraph (1);

(3) act as liaison with United States and international intelligence agencies where appropriate and when necessary to achieve the purpose set for in paragraph (1); and

(4) ensure that the bilateral negotiations under paragraph (1) complement the ongoing international negotiations with Iran.

SEC. 4. OFFICE OF HIGH-LEVEL U.S. REPRESENTATIVE OR SPECIAL ENVOY.

Not later than 30 days after the appointment of a high-level United States representative or special envoy under section 3(a), the Secretary of State shall establish in the Department of State an office for the purpose of supporting the work of the representative or special envoy.

SEC. 5. REPORTING TO CONGRESS.
(a) REPORTS.—Not later than 60 days after the high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran is appointed under section 3, and every 180 days thereafter, the United States representative or special envoy shall report to the committees set forth in subsection (b) on the status and progress of negotiations conducted under section 3(c). Each such report may, when necessary or appropriate, be submitted in classified and unclassified form.

(b) COMMITTEES.—The committees referred to in subsection (a) are—

(1) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Armed Services, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives; and

(2) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Armed Services, and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate.

SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2008 and 2009.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Why Is Fighting Sanctions So Hard?

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has just released a new report entitled "Iran sanctions: Impact in Furthering U.S. Objectives Is Unclear and Should Be Reviewed." The report was requested by Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT), the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs in the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The GAO was asked to review (1) U.S. sanctions targeting Iran and their implementation, (2) reported sanction impacts, and (3) factors limiting sanctions.

According to the report:
"U.S. officials report that U.S. sanctions have slowed foreign investment in Iran’s petroleum sector, denied parties involved in Iran’s proliferation and terrorism activities access to the U.S. financial system, and provided a clear statement of U.S. concerns to the rest of the world. However, other evidence raises questions about the extent of reported impacts. Since 2003, the Iranian government has signed contracts reported at about $20 billion with foreign firms to develop its energy resources. Further, sanctioned Iranian banks may fund their activities in currencies other than the dollar. Moreover, while Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, according to the November 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, it continues to enrich uranium, acquire advanced weapons technology, and support terrorism. Finally, U.S. agencies do not systematically collect or analyze data demonstrating the overall impact and results of their sanctioning and enforcement actions.

"Iran’s global trade ties and leading role in energy production make it difficult for the United States to isolate Iran and pressure it to reduce proliferation and support for terrorism."

The new report concludes:

"We recommend that the Congress consider requiring the National Security Council (NSC), in collaboration with the Departments of State, the Treasury, Energy, and Commerce; the intelligence community; and U.S. enforcement agencies to (1) collect, analyze, and improve data on Iran sanctions and conduct a baseline assessment of the impact and use of the sanctions; (2) develop a framework for assessing the ongoing impact of U.S. sanctions, taking into consideration the contribution of multilateral sanctions; and (3) report periodically to the Congress on the sanctions’ impact."

(Click here to read highlights of the report.)

President Bush referred to the efficacy of sanctions in 2004 when he explained why the U.S. had taken a backseat and left negotiations on Iran's nuclear program to Britain, France and Germany: "We're relying upon others, because we've sanctioned ourselves out of influence with Iran. In other words, we don't have much leverage with the Iranians right now, and we expect them to listen to those voices, and we're a part of the universal acclaim."

So, why then, is fighting sanctions such hard work?

Congressional Resolution of Disapproval on Saudi Arms Sale

On January 14, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Saudi Arabia of Joint Direct Attack Munitions. The total value of the sale could be as high as $123 million. The notice of the sale to Congress is required by law. Congress has 30 days to pass a joint resolution to stop the deal, but a two-thirds majority is required in both houses in order to override a presidential veto.

As they have consistently promised to do since a package of arms sales to Gulf Cooperation Council countries was first announced in July 2007, several Members of Congress, led by Rep. Anthony Weiner, introduced a join resolution of disapproval of the proposed sale on January 15. Below is the text of the resolution. As of January 16, the bill has 52 co-sponsors in the House.


H.J.RES. 76

110th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. J. RES. 76

Disapproving the issuance of a letter of offer with respect to a certain proposed sale of defense articles and defense services to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 15, 2008

Mr. WEINER (for himself, Mr. ALTMIRE, Mr. BACA, Ms. BALDWIN, Ms. BERKLEY, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. BOSWELL, Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, Ms. CASTOR, Mr. COHEN, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. CUMMINGS, Ms. DELAURO, Mr. FATTAH, Mr. FERGUSON, Mr. FILNER, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mr. HALL of New York, Mr. HARE, Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, Mr. HINCHEY, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. HOLT, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. KAGEN, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. KLEIN of Florida, Mr. KUCINICH, Ms. LEE, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mrs. MALONEY of New York, Mr. MICHAUD, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. NADLER, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. ROTHMAN, Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Ms. SCHWARTZ, Ms. SHEA-PORTER, Mr. STARK, Mr. THOMPSON of California, Mr. TOWNS, Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Ms. WATERS, Mr. WEXLER, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. WU, and Mrs. TAUSCHER) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs


JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the issuance of a letter of offer with respect to a certain proposed sale of defense articles and defense services to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the issuance of a letter of offer with respect to the proposed sale of defense articles and defense services to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (described in the certifications transmitted to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate pursuant to section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act on January 14, 2008 (Transmittal Number 08-18)) is hereby prohibited.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

New Report on Saudi Arms Deal

Yesterday, the Bush administration initiated the formal 30-day notification process for the proposed sale of 900 Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) to Saudi Arabia. In response, my colleagues Travis Sharp and Katie Mounts released a report they have been working on for some time arguing that the administration continues to use deadly technologies as the flawed currency of friendship with foreign nations.

The report concludes that instead of working with countries to improve political freedom, the $20 billion sale rewards an oppressive Saudi monarchy whose human rights record has not met expectations of improvement following the accession to the throne of King Abdullah in August 2005. Moderate Muslims throughout the world resent American involvement in the perpetuation of oppressive regimes through the sale of advanced weaponry. Read the report online here.

Monday, January 14, 2008

Raising the Chances for Success in Negotiating with Iran

Here is the recently-released United States Institute of Peace Special Report I highly recommend on "Negotiating with the Islamic Republic of Iran: Raising the Chances for Success Fifteen Points to Remember." It is part of USIP's Cross -Cultural Negotiation Project. It was written by Ambassador (Ret.) John Limbert who served in Iran and was one of the hostages at the US embassy in Tehran from 1979 to 1981. Ambassador Limbert is also working on a book on Iranian negotiating behavior that is scheduled to be completed later this year.

Friday, January 04, 2008

Congress and Iran: 2007 in Review and 2008 Outlook

Congress devoted a significant amount of time and attention to Iran in 2007, a country that has proven to be a significant foreign policy challenge to the United States. By and large, Congress focused its efforts on hyping the threat from Iran and greasing the skids for the Bush administration to employ stronger punitive measures to coerce Iran into compliance with demands for an end to the country’s nuclear enrichment program.

Despite warnings from experts and key Iranian dissidents including Akbar Ganji and Shirin Ebadi, Congress approved funding for a controversial program to “promote democracy” inside Iran. The House also passed several measures to expand economic sanctions against Iran and enable a growing divestment movement. These measures still await Senate debate in 2008 and it is unclear if they will become public law. Congress also pressed for the Administration to label the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp and its elite Quds force as terrorist organizations.

On the positive front, growing concern over a potential conflict with Iran led many members of Congress to introduce resolutions that would reinforce Congressional war-making authority. None of the resolutions, however, ever came to a stand alone vote in 2007. It is uncertain whether any will in 2008.

Below is a summary of all major Congressional actions on Iran in 2007.


Iran Provisions in the Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill

On December 19, 2007, Congress passed an omnibus appropriations bill which included the consolidated State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2008. The bill provides for $60 million to be made available for “programs to promote democracy, the rule of law and governance in Iran.” The explanatory statement accompanying the bill specifies only two numbers with respect to Iran: $21.8 million for Economic Support Funds (ESF); and $8 million for the Democracy Fund. The remainder of the $60 million is embedded in other accounts and amounts are not specified. The final appropriation was nearly halved from President Bush’s February 2007 budget request of $108.71 million, including $75 million for Economic Support Funds (ESF), $28.21 million for the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) Voice of America - Persian and Radio Farda programs and $5.5 million in Diplomatic and Consular Program (D&CP) funds. The Bush administration is likely to again request funds for the fiscal year 2009 budget, which will be presented to Congress in February 2008.

Iran Provisions in the Defense Authorization Bill

The Fiscal Year 2008 Defense Authorization Act includes a provision the which states that it is the “Sense of Congress” that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps be designated as a foreign terrorist organization and placed on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists established by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The provision was inserted following the passage of the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment. However, the provision also strongly endorses “the administration’s pursuit of a diplomatic approach to address this Iranian threat.”

The Defense Authorization bill also includes a provision based on H.R. 885, which was passed by the House in June, to designate $50 million to support the establishment of an international nuclear fuel bank under the auspices of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The measure was introduced by Representative Tom Lantos (D-CA), primarily to prevent Iran and other countries from developing their own indigenous nuclear fuel cycle technology and instead force the countries to rely on international sources.

House and Senate Conferees of the FY ‘08 Defense Authorization Bill agreed to drop a provision in the Senate version of the bill that would have prohibited not more than 75 percent of the amount authorized from being obligated until the President submitted a report on policy objectives and United States Strategy regarding Iran. Of particular note, the Conference Report of the FY ’08 Defense Authorization bill states that the report was submitted. According to a senior congressional aide, the Bush administration did submit the report in Summer 2007 after they had seen the provision in the Senate version of the Defense Authorization bill. The senior congressional aide also said that the report, presumably drafted by the State Department, had an early 2007 date on it but seemed to have been sitting collecting dust until the administration decided to send it to Congress. The senior congressional aide said it was possible that after the State Department drafted the report, the Office of the Vice President or perhaps someone else refused to clear it because of language about a commitment to diplomacy. There is only a classified version and Congress has not pursued insisting on an unclassified version because the whole exercise was "frustrating and the report was not particularly long or substantive, and we got pulled on to other things."

The FY ‘08 Defense Authorization bill requires that the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, submit to the Congressional Defense Committees a report describing and assessing in detail Iran’s role in Iraq. The report must be submitted within 60 days after the date of the enactment and every 180 days thereafter. It also provides that the reporting requirement will terminate when the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, certifies to the congressional defense committees that Iran has ceased to provide military support to anti-coalition forces in Iraq.

The Defense Authorization bill also includes a provision stating it is the policy of the United States to develop and deploy in conjunction with its allies and other nations an effective defense against Iranian ballistic missiles. The provision was added to the Senate version on July 12, when the Senate voted 90 to 5 to pass Amendment No. 2024 introduced by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL). It should be noted, however, that Congress cut out $85 million in construction funding for the new missile defense sites in Europe from the Fiscal Year 2008 Defense Appropriations bill. For Fiscal Year 2009, it likely that the Iranian ballistic missile threat will continue to be the justification for building a missile defense site in Eastern Europe and funds will once again be requested for developing and deploying such a system.

The House version of the FY ‘08 Defense Authorization also contained a provision which would have prohibited the Department of Defense from procuring goods or services from companies in violation of the Iran-Syria Nonproliferation Act (Public Law 106–178; 50 U.S.C. 1701). However, the FY ’08 Defense Authorization Act Conference Report refused to blacklist violators of the Iran-Syria Nonproliferation Act.


Congressional Resolutions on War-Making Authority

Heightened concern over a potential conflict with Iran and the possibility that the Bush administration may construe an authorization for use of force against Iran prompted several members of Congress to introduce resolutions on war-making authority in 2007.

On January 12, Representatives Walter Jones (R-NC) and Jack Murtha (D-PA) introduced H.J. Res. 14 requiring Congressional authorization prior to a military attack on Iran, absent a national emergency created by an attack by Iran. The resolution currently has 66 co-sponsors. It is unclear whether the co-sponsors will try to introduce it as an amendment to must-pass legislation in 2008 and also unclear if it will come up for a vote as a stand alone measure.

On January 24, Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) introduced S.Res.39 expressing the sense of the Senate on the need for approval by the Congress before any offensive military action by the United States against another nation. Though the resolution does not specifically mention Iran, it is meant to prevent a military conflict without prior Congressional approval. Senator Byrd introduced the resolution as amendments to several must-pass bills in 2007, but none of the amendments ever came to a vote on the floor.

Representative Barbara Lee introduced H.R. 770 on January 31 to prohibit the use of funds to carry out any covert action for the purpose of causing regime change in Iran or to carry out any military action against Iran in the absence of an imminent threat, in accordance with international law and constitutional and statutory requirements for congressional authorization. It was subsequently referred to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, Armed Services, and Intelligence. The resolution currently has 19 co-sponsors and unclear if it will come up for a vote in 2008.

On February 5, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced H.Con.Res. 43 which expresses the sense of Congress that the President should implement Recommendation 9 of the Iraq Study Group Report and engage directly with Iran and Syria in order to try to obtain their commitment to constructive policies toward Iraq and other regional issues. The resolution currently has 12 co-sponsors. It is unclear whether the co-sponsors will try to introduce it as an amendment to must-pass legislation in 2008 and also unclear if it will come up for a vote as a stand alone measure.

On February 15, Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) introduced S.Con.Res. 13, which expresses the sense of Congress that the President should not initiate military action against Iran without first obtaining authorization from Congress. Senator Sanders made several attempts to introduce his resolution as an amendment to must-pass legislation in 2007, but no amendments ever came to a vote.

Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) introduced S. 759 on March 5 to prohibit the use of funds for military operations in Iran without Congressional authorization. It currently has three co-sponsors. On July 19, Rep. Mark Udall (D-CO) introduced H.R. 3119, the House companion legislation to Senator Jim Webb’s S. 759. The bill currently has 27 co-sponsors. It is unclear whether the co-sponsors will try to introduce the bill as an amendment to must-pass legislation in 2008 and also unclear if it will come up for a vote as a stand alone measure.

On October 25, Representatives Walter Jones (R-NC), Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD) and Ron Paul (R-TX) and Bill Delahunt (D-MA) announced H. J. Res. 53, a bill to restore the constitutional checks and balances over declaring war. Although the bill does not specifically mention Iran, it is clearly meant to reassert the Congressional war-making power to prevent such a conflict.

On October 25, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) introduced S. Res. 356, which currently has 13 co-sponsors, more than any other Senate resolution on preventing war with Iran. Current co-sponsors are: Akaka, Bingaman, Brown, Byrd, Clinton, Dodd, Dorgan, Feinstein, Johnson, Murray, Sanders, Stabenow and Whitehouse. The bill has been referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, but the Senators may look for other opportunities in 2008 to introduce it to must pass legislation. Senator Durbin’s goal is to attract a large group of co-sponsors in order to make it clear that many Senators are wary of a military conflict with Iran, at least not without prior Congressional approval.

Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) introduced S.J.Res. 23 on November 2 to clarify that the use of force against Iran is “not authorized by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq, any resolution previously adopted, or any other provision of law.” The resolution was subsequently referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and it does not have any co-sponsors. Representative Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) introduced the House companion legislation, H.J.Res. 64. It was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and currently has 16 co-sponsors. Neither resolution is likely to come up for a vote in 2008.

Following the passage of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment to the Fiscal Year 2008 Defense Authorization bill expressing the sense of Senate that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps should be labeled a terrorist organization, Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) initiated and sent a letter to Bush signed by 30 senators emphasizing “that no offensive military action would be justified against Iran without the express consent of Congress.” Meanwhile, Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) sent a personal letter to Bush on October 17 embracing a more comprehensive approach, urging the president to “offer direct, unconditional and comprehensive talks with Iran.”


Sanctions and Divestment Bills

Representative Mark Kirk (R-IL) introduced H.R. 2880 to enhance the Iran Sanctions Act by expanding economic sanctions against Iran to include the importation of refined petroleum. The bill has currently has 34 co-sponsors and has been referred to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, Financial Services, Oversight and Government Reform, and Ways and Means. It is unclear whether the resolution will come up for a vote in 2008.

On July 31, the House passed H.R. 957 by a vote of 415-11. The resolution adds to the list of those that can be sanctioned for making investments that increase Iran's ability to develop it petroleum resources.

On July 31, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 2347, the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act, by a vote of 408-6, despite opposition from the Secretaries of State and Treasury. The bill will establish a federal list of companies that have direct investments in Iran’s energy sector and remove specific legal barriers to enable mutual fund and corporate pension fund managers to cut ties with these listed companies if they choose to do so. The bill also provides federal authority for state and local governments that choose to divest their public pension funds and calls on the U.S. government to list companies with more than $20 million invested in Iran's energy sector. The Senate companion bill, S. 1430, was introduced by Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Sam Brownback (R-KS) and subsequently referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. It is unclear whether it will come up for a vote in 2008, but there are forces pushing for its passage.

On September 25, the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007, H.R. 1400, was voted on Suspension and passed 397-16. Four Republicans and 12 Democrats voted against the measure, with 20 Members not voting. It should be noted that during the floor debate of the bill, not a single Member of Congress stood up to speak in opposition of the bill. Though the bill expresses that it is the Sense of Congress that "the United States should use diplomatic and economic means to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem," the bill focuses on imposing broader unilateral sanctions without calling for the implementation of a more comprehensive diplomatic strategy for resolving all outstanding issues with Iran. In other words, the bill focuses on employing bigger "sticks" in dealing with Iran rather than embracing a comprehensive approach.

Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) introduced H.Con.Res. 257 on November 13. The resolution expresses concern regarding arms transfers to Iran and Syria by the Russian Federation and entities in the Russian Federation and urges the President to implement sanctions against such entities found to be in violation of United States law prohibiting arms transfers to both countries. The resolution was referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. It currently has 7 co-sponsors. It is likely that Rep. Ros-Lehtinen will push for a vote on the resolution in 2008.

Human Rights and Iran

On September 25, H.R.3653, sponsored by Rep. Gus M. Bilirakis (R-FL), to hold the current regime in Iran accountable for its human rights record and to support a transition to democracy in Iran, was introduced and referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The bill makes a direct link "between the state of freedom and democracy within Iran and the efforts of the current regime of Iran to acquire nuclear weapons and the long-term success of the global war on terror." Senator Brownback (R-KS) introduced the Senate version of the bill, S. 1534, on May 25, 2007 and it was referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

On October 3, H.Con.Res.203, which condemns the persecution of labor rights advocates in Iran, was voted on under Suspension of the Rules and passed 418-1. The resolution was then referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. It is unclear whether the resolution will come to a vote in the Senate in 2009.


Miscellaneous Congressional Resolutions Taking a Hard Line on Iran

On January 25, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced S. 387, a bill to prohibit the sale by the Department of Defense of parts for F-14 fighter aircraft. Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) introduced the House companion legislation, H.R. 1441 on March 6. The House passed the resolution on June 11 and it was referred back to the Senate Committee on Armed Services. The bill is unlikely to come up for a vote in the Senate in 2008.

Representative Jim Saxton introduced H.R. 1324 on March 5 to urge the Secretary of State to designate the Quds Force, a unit of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, as a foreign terrorist organization. The resolution has 12 co-sponsors, but it is unlikely to come up for a vote in 2008 following the announcement on October 25 by the Departments of State and Treasury of their decision to label the Quds force a terrorist organization as part of an unprecedented package of sanctions.

Following the Iranian capture of British soldiers in the Shatt al Arab waterway on March 23, the House passed H.Res. 267 on March 27 which condemned the seizure and called for the immediate, safe, and unconditional release of the soldiers. The Senate passed a similar resolution, S.Res. 136, on March 29

On May 24, the Senate passed S.Res. 214, a resolution calling for the immediate release of Iranian-American scholar Dr. Haleh Esfandiari, who had been detained by the government of Iran since December 2006. On June 5, the House passed a similar resolution, H.Res. 430 by a vote of 411-0. The resolution called on the government of Iran to immediately and unconditionally release not only Dr. Esfandiari but all five dual Iranian-American citizens including Ms. Parnaz Azima, Mr. Kian Tajbakhsh, Mr. Ali Shakeri, and a fifth unnamed individual, all of whom had been detained by the Iranian government under charges of violating national security. The Iranian government detained the individuals because of a growing fear of the prospect of a “velvet revolution” funded by the U.S. through the so-called democracy assistance program. All of the individuals were released from prison by September.

On June 20, the House passed H.Con.Res.21 by a vote of 411-2. The resolution calls on the United Nations Security Council to charge Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and United Nations Charter because of his calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. The resolution was subsequently sent to the Senate and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. It is unlikely to come up for a vote in the Senate in 2008.

On September 27, Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) introduced H.Res.690 and the bill was referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The resolution expresses the grave concern of the House of Representatives for Iran and Syria's continued and systematic violations of UN Resolutions 1701 and 1559. This bill expresses concern over Syrian and Iranian interference in Lebanon, particularly in supporting Hezbollah, and calls on Hezbollah to release the Israeli soldiers and for all militias in Lebanon to disband. It expresses "its vigorous support for a democratic Lebanon."

On October 16, Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) introduced H.Con.Res. 235, a resolution which “urges the Board of Directors of the World Bank to request a policy review of current disbursements to the Islamic Republic of Iran and to end these disbursements until the International Atomic Energy Agency certifies the compliance of Iran with resolutions 1696 and 1747 of the United Nations Security Council and the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.” The resolution also urges “the United Nations Security Council to order the World Bank to end disbursements to Iran if the Board of Directors of the World Bank fails to take action on its own.” The resolution has 46 co-sponsors and was referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Financial Services. The resolution may come up for a vote in 2009.

On November 5, after only five minutes of debate and not a single member of Congress questioning or speaking in opposition, the House of Representatives unanimously adopted by voice vote H. RES. 435, “Expressing concern relating to the threatening behavior of the Iranian regime and its leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the activities of terrorist organizations sponsored by that regime in Latin America.” The resolution was introduced by Rep. Rob Klein (R-FL) and had 43 co-sponsors when it came up for a vote under the suspension of the rules.


What to Expect in 2008

In August, the Bush Administration announced its intention to sell up to $20 billion in weapons to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Cooperation Council countries and justified the move in part as way to protect allies in the region from a “growing Iranian threat.” Such a deal must be approved by Congress and it has the authority to block major arms sales by passing a joint resolution of disapproval. Several House members, including Nadler (D-NY), Weiner (D-NY), Engel (D-NY) Woolsey (D-CA), Lee (D-CA) and Ferguson (R-NY) announced their intention to try to block the sale, but so far Congress has not yet taken up the issue. It is possible they could do so, however, in 2008.

It is likely that Congress will continue to press for further unilateral sanctions on Iran. All of the sanctions bills passed by the House in 2007 still await Senate approval before they can become law. Expect to also see new resolutions that would further expand existing sanctions.

Congress and the Bush administration will also likely continue hyping the threat of the Iranian ballistic missile program and use it as a justification for developing and deploying a missile defense system in Eastern Europe. Though the funding was cut for Fiscal Year 2008, the Administration will more than likely request it for 2009 and some members of Congress will work to ensure it remains in the Defense Appropriations bill.

The release of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran in December gave impetus to a growing movement of members of Congress calling on the Bush administration to pursue sustained, direct, unconditional diplomacy with Iran. Congressional efforts in this area should be bolstered as it has been the key missing strategy for resolving tensions with Iran.