[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 102 (Thursday, June 15, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3544-S3545]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



            Countering Iran's Destabilizing Activities Bill

  Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I joined our colleagues today at lunch, and 
one of the conversations I had with one of my Democratic colleagues was 
how surprising, perhaps, but certainly how pleasing it was that today 
the Senate, in a bipartisan fashion, addressed some contentious issues 
related to sanctions in regard to Iran; issues related to sanctions in 
regard to Russia. Both of those issues, because of the political 
climate and because of past history, could be fraught with great 
opportunity for partisanship to be exhibited in full force. The 
conversation I had with my colleague was how surprising and, more 
importantly, how pleasing it was that didn't happen.

[[Page S3545]]

  I commend the Senate and its leadership for working together to 
resolve their potential differences and creating this opportunity for 
us to have a debate, a discussion, both on public policy--that I think 
is important to the security of the world--and the safety of Americans 
here in the United States.
  I am here, in part, to express my support for the Countering Iran's 
Destabilizing Activities Act, the legislation we addressed today. It 
permits our government to target those individuals and institutions 
responsible for a foreign policy that puts American lives at risk and 
undermines the security, particularly in the Middle East, but really of 
the globe.
  The theocratic, autocratic regime's survival in Iran depends 
currently on the human rights abuses and political oppression. Eight 
years after the Green Movement's protests, the group's leaders remain 
under house arrest. Members of that movement were tortured. Still, 
today, Iranian Americans are unreasonably detained without hope for 
release in Iran. The Iranian regime's survival depends further on its 
control of its economy. When it was brokered, proponents of the Joint 
Comprehensive Plan of Action argued it would provide economic benefit 
to the Iranian people.
  So when President Obama negotiated--and this Congress, this Senate, 
failed to reject the JCPOA--one of the arguments about its benefits is 
that everyday Iranians would enjoy greater economic opportunity. 
Instead, a recent Reuters study shows businesses directly tied to the 
Supreme Leader and the IRGC are the main beneficiaries of those changes 
in our relationship with Iran. Despite renewed economic growth, Iran's 
unemployment rate is estimated to be as high as 12 percent, and that 
figure could be as high as almost 30 percent among Iranian youth.
  Survival of Khamenei's regime depends on stoking hatred of America as 
a way to whip up support. Iran uses small boats to swarm American Navy 
ships protecting the free navigation of the Strait of Hormuz in the 
Persian Gulf. This is disturbing for a number of reasons, but the 
importance of that Strait's role in global economy certainly is one of 
them. In addition, it is linked to scouting soft American targets for 
terrorism.
  So we continue to see bad behavior, threatening behavior by the 
Iranian government toward the United States and our global interest in 
the Strait of Hormuz and the suggestion that Iran is preparing and 
looking for opportunities for terrorist attacks against the United 
States and its allies in the Middle East.
  Last week, two Hezbollah operatives were arrested here in the United 
States. They were doing surveillance on targets in New York and on our 
embassies as well in Israel and Panama. Two terrorism specialists, Dan 
Byman of Georgetown and Scott Stewart of Stratfor, tweeted in reaction 
to this news that this could be a case of Iran sending us an ominous 
message; that Iran can play the terror card if it wants to. If that is 
indeed the signal Tehran is sending to us, it is important--it is 
imperative, in fact, that we send a message of our own that no 
civilized country resorts to planning to kill innocent civilians. The 
legislation we passed today informs that regime that the JCPOA does not 
provide impunity for Iran to make such plans.
  Iran threatens its neighbors with its ongoing ballistic missile 
development, which was not part of the JCPOA. Hezbollah is armed with 
tens of thousands of rockets, threatening Israel's security. This is 
the same group which has been instrumental in propping up the Assad 
regime in Syria and which is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of 
thousands. The head of the IRGC forces was seen on the Syria and Iraq 
border just this past weekend. We know Assad's regime would have not 
survived without Iran's continued financial and military support. 
Again, this legislation underscores the Senate's belief that the 
Iranian regime must not be allowed to continue conducting and 
destabilizing activities under the shield of the JCPOA.
  I was an opponent to the JCPOA, but today's actions are unrelated to 
undermining that agreement, which is now in place. They are designed to 
hold back further activities by the Iranian regime against America and 
its interests. It is really a requirement that Iran act within the 
nation-states' Code of Conduct--the normal behavior of a country around 
the globe.
  Previous administrations, in my view, failed to challenge Iran on way 
too many fronts. With this legislation, the Senate is intent on pushing 
back on Iran's adventurism in the Middle East and beyond. By imposing 
appropriate sanctions and requiring the Secretaries of State, Defense 
and Treasury, as well as Director of National Intelligence, to 
formulate a coherent strategy to counter Iran's influence in the 
region, we say to the regime that their activities will be countered 
every step of the way.
  This legislation plays a part in doing what Dan Byman, the 
professor--the terrorism expert--testified to our House counterparts 
last month. His words were to ``highlight the costs of Iran's 
adventurism to ordinary Iranians to raise domestic awareness of, and 
discontent with, the regime's foreign policy.''
  There remains more that can be done to challenge Iran and constrict 
its resources. Many amendments were filed to strengthen this 
legislation that were not ultimately considered. One of those was mine. 
Last year, the Obama administration announced it would pay $1.7 billion 
to Iran in an effort to settle a longstanding financial dispute. 
Transferring cash to a leading state sponsor of terror was a bad idea 
when the Senate considered the 2015 nuclear agreement, and it remains a 
bad idea, a terrible idea today.
  The amendment I offered to today's legislation would limit the 
President's ability to transfer funds to Iran. This amendment directs 
that the U.S. Government puts justice for American victims of Iranian 
terrorism ahead of the payments to the Iranian's regime. No 
administration should transfer funds related to the Iran-United States 
Claims Tribunal without first requiring settlement of all damages 
already awarded in judgments made in the U.S. courts against Iran for 
their terrorism crimes against our own citizens. Paying our own 
citizens from that fund before any money is transferred to the Iranian 
regime makes sense, common sense, and it is surrounded by the sense of 
justice and right.
  While my amendment was not one of those considered by the Senate yet, 
we will be introducing this concept as freestanding legislation in the 
near future.
  I know sanctions alone will not change Iran's regime's behavior. 
Incidentally, we need our allies and friends to join us in this 
sanction effort. Yet we know the Countering Iran's Destabilizing 
Activities Act remains an important bill to impose costs on the regime 
in Iran and, hopefully, to encourage more of the discontent we saw 
during the recent elections. Perhaps there will rise an equivalent to 
the 2009 Green Movement that offers Iranians one more opportunity to 
throw off the yoke of theocratic rule of tyranny and get the government 
they deserve--one that respects their rights and has the desire to 
coexist peacefully with its neighbors.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.