SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Hillary's Better on Iran Diplomacy Than Key Senate Democrats - and Rand Paul
Apr 13, 2015
Do you remember when Rand Paul was threatening to run for President to Hillary Clinton's left on war and peace? It seems like ancient history now, doesn't it?
When the Administration announced the framework deal on Iran's nuclear program, Hillary backed it right away. It was "3 AM," as it were, and Hillary was waiting by the phone. (It wasn't really 3 AM, but the deal was announced on Thursday and Hillary made her statement Thursday evening; compared to many Senate Democrats, she responded right away.)
Rand Paul, on the other hand, signed the letter to Iran of the Cotton 47 threatening to kill any deal. But far worse in terms of practical impact, Rand Paul is a backer of the Corker-Menendez bill, the main legislative vehicle of Republicans trying to kill the talks, which would allow Congressional Republicans to veto the deal. The Corker bill as written could prove to be a de facto authorization for military force against Iran, because if the Corker bill succeeds in blowing up diplomacy, we're on a highway to war with no apparent exit ramp.
So, as we move towards 2016, Rand Paul is becoming just another pro-war Republican on national security issues, while Hillary is now playing a key role on the Democratic pro-diplomacy team.
But reality at present is more sobering than that, because there are a bunch of key Senate Democrats who are not yet on the pro-diplomacy team; they're not as good as Hillary right now. Some of them are playing for the pro-war team right now, some are silent so far, and some are playing both sides of the fence.
The most prominent of the Senate Democrats playing on the pro-war team right now is New York Democrat and apparent Minority-Leader-In-Waiting Chuck Schumer. But he is not alone. Less prominent now since being indicted on federal corruption charges but still vocal is New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez.
Playing both sides of the fence is Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal. He slammed the framework deal in a New York radio interview on Sunday and said that's why he's supporting the Corker bill; but he has also said "I hope there will be no interference or impeding impact on the negotiation," even though the purpose of the Corker bill is to kill the deal.
On the apparently silent team so far is Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey. He is generally considered a friend of the arms control community, which is strongly backing the framework deal. Markey's apparent silence is particularly remarkable because he serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which is expected on Tuesday to formally consider the Corker-Menendez bill.
You can urge your Senators to oppose the Corker-Menendez bill here. If your Senator happens to serve on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, you can call them here.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Robert Naiman
Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy. Naiman has worked as a policy analyst and researcher at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. He has masters degrees in economics and mathematics from the University of Illinois and has studied and worked in the Middle East.
Do you remember when Rand Paul was threatening to run for President to Hillary Clinton's left on war and peace? It seems like ancient history now, doesn't it?
When the Administration announced the framework deal on Iran's nuclear program, Hillary backed it right away. It was "3 AM," as it were, and Hillary was waiting by the phone. (It wasn't really 3 AM, but the deal was announced on Thursday and Hillary made her statement Thursday evening; compared to many Senate Democrats, she responded right away.)
Rand Paul, on the other hand, signed the letter to Iran of the Cotton 47 threatening to kill any deal. But far worse in terms of practical impact, Rand Paul is a backer of the Corker-Menendez bill, the main legislative vehicle of Republicans trying to kill the talks, which would allow Congressional Republicans to veto the deal. The Corker bill as written could prove to be a de facto authorization for military force against Iran, because if the Corker bill succeeds in blowing up diplomacy, we're on a highway to war with no apparent exit ramp.
So, as we move towards 2016, Rand Paul is becoming just another pro-war Republican on national security issues, while Hillary is now playing a key role on the Democratic pro-diplomacy team.
But reality at present is more sobering than that, because there are a bunch of key Senate Democrats who are not yet on the pro-diplomacy team; they're not as good as Hillary right now. Some of them are playing for the pro-war team right now, some are silent so far, and some are playing both sides of the fence.
The most prominent of the Senate Democrats playing on the pro-war team right now is New York Democrat and apparent Minority-Leader-In-Waiting Chuck Schumer. But he is not alone. Less prominent now since being indicted on federal corruption charges but still vocal is New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez.
Playing both sides of the fence is Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal. He slammed the framework deal in a New York radio interview on Sunday and said that's why he's supporting the Corker bill; but he has also said "I hope there will be no interference or impeding impact on the negotiation," even though the purpose of the Corker bill is to kill the deal.
On the apparently silent team so far is Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey. He is generally considered a friend of the arms control community, which is strongly backing the framework deal. Markey's apparent silence is particularly remarkable because he serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which is expected on Tuesday to formally consider the Corker-Menendez bill.
You can urge your Senators to oppose the Corker-Menendez bill here. If your Senator happens to serve on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, you can call them here.
Robert Naiman
Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy. Naiman has worked as a policy analyst and researcher at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. He has masters degrees in economics and mathematics from the University of Illinois and has studied and worked in the Middle East.
Do you remember when Rand Paul was threatening to run for President to Hillary Clinton's left on war and peace? It seems like ancient history now, doesn't it?
When the Administration announced the framework deal on Iran's nuclear program, Hillary backed it right away. It was "3 AM," as it were, and Hillary was waiting by the phone. (It wasn't really 3 AM, but the deal was announced on Thursday and Hillary made her statement Thursday evening; compared to many Senate Democrats, she responded right away.)
Rand Paul, on the other hand, signed the letter to Iran of the Cotton 47 threatening to kill any deal. But far worse in terms of practical impact, Rand Paul is a backer of the Corker-Menendez bill, the main legislative vehicle of Republicans trying to kill the talks, which would allow Congressional Republicans to veto the deal. The Corker bill as written could prove to be a de facto authorization for military force against Iran, because if the Corker bill succeeds in blowing up diplomacy, we're on a highway to war with no apparent exit ramp.
So, as we move towards 2016, Rand Paul is becoming just another pro-war Republican on national security issues, while Hillary is now playing a key role on the Democratic pro-diplomacy team.
But reality at present is more sobering than that, because there are a bunch of key Senate Democrats who are not yet on the pro-diplomacy team; they're not as good as Hillary right now. Some of them are playing for the pro-war team right now, some are silent so far, and some are playing both sides of the fence.
The most prominent of the Senate Democrats playing on the pro-war team right now is New York Democrat and apparent Minority-Leader-In-Waiting Chuck Schumer. But he is not alone. Less prominent now since being indicted on federal corruption charges but still vocal is New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez.
Playing both sides of the fence is Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal. He slammed the framework deal in a New York radio interview on Sunday and said that's why he's supporting the Corker bill; but he has also said "I hope there will be no interference or impeding impact on the negotiation," even though the purpose of the Corker bill is to kill the deal.
On the apparently silent team so far is Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey. He is generally considered a friend of the arms control community, which is strongly backing the framework deal. Markey's apparent silence is particularly remarkable because he serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which is expected on Tuesday to formally consider the Corker-Menendez bill.
You can urge your Senators to oppose the Corker-Menendez bill here. If your Senator happens to serve on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, you can call them here.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy