House Democrats expressed concerns on Wednesday about a looming Iran nuclear deal as efforts by the Biden administration to revive the Obama-era agreement are underway.
In a statement and a press conference, 18 lawmakers raised everything from concerns about the negotiations to outright opposition to reviving the 2015 deal, formally called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, that exchanged sanctions relief for limits to Iran’s nuclear program.
“We understand that while the recent negotiations have not concluded, we feel that we can’t stay quiet about the unacceptable and deeply troubling turn that these results have reportedly taken,” Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.) told reporters.
Former President Trump pulled the U.S. out of the agreement in 2018, arguing that it was not preventing Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons, after which Iran largely stopped complying with the deal.
President Biden committed on the campaign trail to reviving the deal, and Iran has been at the negotiating table with other world powers in Vienna over the past year to come to a new agreement.
But lawmakers have been skeptical about reviving the agreement, with senators on the left and the right raising concerns last month that the Biden administration wasn’t being completely transparent about the state of negotiations.
Rep. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), who opposed the deal in 2015, said she was again concerned by public information becoming available about the negotiations.
“Any new agreement with Iran must be based on the situation that is on the ground today, not the one from seven years ago,” Meng said. “This means an agreement that is comprehensive and addresses the full range of threats that Iran poses to the region, including its nuclear program, ballistic missile program and its funding of terrorism.”
Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) said in a statement that he was concerned about the U.S. lifting the foreign terrorist organization designation against Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, which was placed on the list in 2019. He also raised concerns that the deal would allow Russia to continue doing energy business with Iran.
“Are we seriously going to let war criminal, Vladimir Putin, be the guarantor of the deal?” he said. “We must address the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, stand strong against terrorists, and protect American values and our allies.”
Some Democrats, such as Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), said that they weren’t opposed to a new agreement broadly but were opposed to one that wouldn’t prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
“I want to make something abundantly clear. I am not opposed to an agreement,” Phillips said. “I am opposed to an agreement that does not absolutely, positively prevent Iran from either producing or obtaining a nuclear weapon. I believe I speak for an overwhelming majority of the United States Congress to that end.”
It’s unclear when a deal would be announced. Late last month, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said that Tehran and the West were “closer to an agreement in Vienna than ever before.”
But Robert Malley, the U.S. special envoy to Iran, later said that he wasn’t confident that a deal was imminent.
“I have long said that a new deal with Iran must be stronger and last longer than the previous agreement,” said Rep. Kathy Manning (D-N.C.).
“Any new agreement should address Iran’s support for terrorist groups, offer clarity about the sunset provisions and set forth a long-term strategy for preventing a nuclear-armed Iran,” she continued.