[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 160 (Thursday, October 5, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6352-S6353]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         IRAN NUCLEAR AGREEMENT

  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, the United States is facing an urgent 
nuclear crisis with North Korea. President Trump should not trigger 
another nuclear crisis with Iran.
  North Korea's nuclear program presents a clear and direct threat to 
the United States. Our top military official, General Dunford, 
testified last month that North Korea has the capability to strike the 
U.S. mainland with an intercontinental ballistic missile. North Korea 
has ramped up the pace of its ballistic missile tests, firing two ICBMs 
over Japan in recent months. Just last month, North Korea conducted its 
sixth test of a nuclear weapon, the largest yet.
  Meanwhile, President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un are 
engaged in nuclear brinkmanship. Trump has threatened to ``totally 
destroy'' North Korea, has tweeted that North Korea ``might not be 
around much longer,'' and has rebuked his own Secretary of State for 
attempting to find a diplomatic solution. With each reckless 
pronouncement, Trump's threats could bring the United States closer to 
a war that would put at risk millions of lives, including tens of 
thousands of American soldiers.
  Confronted with the North Korean nuclear threat, President Trump is 
seeking to provoke another nuclear crisis, this time in the turbulent 
Middle East. He has repeatedly threatened to withdraw from the 
agreement that the United States and the international community forged 
to prohibit Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. He has called the 
Iran deal an ``embarrassment,'' ``the worst deal ever,'' and has vowed 
to ``rip up'' the agreement. In making those threats, Trump is putting 
our security and credibility at risk.
  The Iran deal is working. It has verifiably shut off Iran's pathways 
to a nuclear bomb, imposed tough constraints on Iran's nuclear program, 
and subjected Iran to the most comprehensive inspection and monitoring 
regime ever negotiated. How do we know? We know from Donald Trump 
himself.
  Just 2 weeks ago, President Trump found Iran in compliance and waived 
nuclear-related sanctions on Iran. In fact, the Trump administration 
has twice certified Iran's compliance with the deal, acknowledging that 
adherence to the agreement is in the vital national security interests 
of the United States. Our State Department, our Defense Department, and 
our intelligence community have all assessed that Iran is in compliance 
with the nuclear agreement. Most importantly, President Trump has 
presented no evidence to Congress, as he is required to do by law, of 
any potential Iranian breach of the deal. In fact, the administration 
has yet to brief the Senate on its strategy for Iran, despite weekly 
requests from my colleagues.
  Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Trump has suggested 
that he will refuse to certify Iran's compliance with the deal by 
October 15, the next deadline. This will effectively kick the deal's 
fate to Congress, which will then have 60 days to decide whether to 
reimpose the nuclear-related sanctions on Iran waived under the deal.
  Make no mistake: Trump's reasons for not certifying Iran's compliance 
are based on politics, not national security. He wants to tear up an 
agreement that has prevented Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, simply 
because it was negotiated by a democratic administration. Trump has 
threatened to do this without offering any alternative plan to block 
Iran from getting a nuclear bomb.
  In the absence of any evidence of an Iranian violation, Trump and his 
team are manufacturing reasons not to certify the deal, citing issues 
not addressed in the nuclear agreement, such as Iran's sponsorship of 
regional terrorism, its ballistic missile tests, and its human rights 
violations.
  Iran is subject to sanctions for those malign activities. Since the 
Iran deal has been implemented, the United States had designated over 
100 individuals and entities for sanctions. Congress passed a new law 
this July, that I cosponsored, sanctioning Iran for these aggressions. 
It is worth underscoring this point: Donald Trump has yet to issue 
instructions to his administration on how to implement that sanctions 
law.
  In short, the Iran deal has not prevented the United States from 
taking measures to hold Iran accountable for its destabilizing actions 
elsewhere. It has, however, prevented Iran from conducting those same 
actions with a nuclear weapon. That is where our focus should continue 
to be. A nuclear-armed Iran would be a far greater menace in the region 
than a nonnuclear Iran.
  The truth is, if the United States had tried to expand the nuclear 
agreement to also address Iran's ballistic missile tests and its 
regional terrorism, there would simply be no deal. Russia and China 
would not have agreed to its terms. Preventing Iran from obtaining a 
nuclear weapon was the only point on which all parties were united. 
Critics of the deal who argue otherwise are not being straight with the 
American people.
  In a world of alternative facts, that point is worth reiterating. No 
deal, including this one, contains everything we want. That is the 
nature of a negotiation. Unilaterally withdrawing from the agreement 
will not produce a better deal today. In fact, we have much less 
negotiating leverage today. The United States does not have the backing 
of our allies and partners around the world for withdrawal. Our 
partners have been crystal clear. They will not renegotiate the deal 
while it is working. Without that international backing, we have no 
leverage with Iran.
  This brings to bear another, equally important, point. This 
administration

[[Page S6353]]

is already putting American credibility at risk; if we manufacture a 
specious excuse for abandoning the Iran agreement, our word will mean 
little. That will make it nearly impossible to negotiate a diplomatic 
solution to the nuclear crisis in North Korea, already an extremely 
challenging prospect. Put simply, our allies, partners, and adversaries 
would have no reason to trust the United States.
  That is why Secretary of Defense Mattis, when asked whether it was in 
the national security interest of the United States to stay in the Iran 
deal, said, ``Yes, Senator, I do.''
  I want to end by outlining the choice we face right now. The choice 
we face right now is between a deal or no deal. It is between cutting 
off Iran's pathways to a bomb or allowing Iran to push forward with its 
nuclear weapons program. It is between maintaining U.S. leadership in 
the world or empowering our adversaries. It is a choice between 
diplomacy or heading down a path toward war.
  For these reasons, I urge President Trump to certify Iran's 
compliance with the nuclear agreement by October 15. If he fails to do 
so, I urge my colleagues in the Senate to preserve the deal.

                          ____________________