Overnight Defense: Pentagon chiefs defend Iran deal

THE TOPLINE: Pentagon leaders sought Wednesday to defend a provision in the Iran nuclear deal that would lift an arms embargo on the nation — a step they had previously advocated against.

Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee, as part of the Obama administration’s sales job on the deal to members of Congress.

{mosads}In a sign of the administration’s laser focus on the issue, Secretary of State John Kerry, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew also appeared at the hearing, which ostensibly was to focus on the nuclear deal’s implications on the U.S. military posture in the Middle East.

Despite the presence of a significant chunk of the president’s Cabinet, skeptical lawmakers grilled Carter and Dempsey on whether the Pentagon supported the deal — a long-time goal for the president, especially given their previous remarks.

At an earlier Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, both leaders had expressed reservations over lifting an arms embargo on Iran, as well as lifting restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program. The deal now on the table does both.

“We want them to continue to be isolated as a military and limited in terms of the kind of equipment and material they’re able to [have],” Carter had said at that hearing on July 7, in response to a question about whether he supported lifting the arms embargo.

Dempsey had gone even farther, saying “Under no circumstances should we relieve pressure on Iran relative to ballistic missile capabilities and arms trafficking.”

The deal would lift a conventional arms embargo on Iran after five years, and restrictions on ballistic missile technology after eight years.

Carter insisted that he supported the deal, and that it would address the U.S.’s top security concern in Iran: the country obtaining nuclear weapons.

Dempsey said he had only advocated for pressure on Iran “for as long as possible.”

During a House hearing on Tuesday, Kerry had argued that U.S. negotiators did not give in on lifting the embargoes.

“We didn’t concede on that — in fact we won a victory,” Kerry said.

“Three of the seven [countries involved in talks] thought that the sanctions ought to be lifted immediately,” he said. “The compromise was the five and eight [years] but we don’t feel like we lost anything,” he added.

Under questioning from Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Dempsey also acknowledged that, as the president’s top military adviser, he has never said that the only two options to preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon were either getting the deal or going to war — a key administration argument.

“No, at no time did that come up in our conversation nor did I make that comment,” Dempsey said, adding, “I can tell you that we have a range of options… There are things between here and there.”

LEW PREDICTS DEM SUPPORT FOR DEAL: Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew predicted that the White House would gain enough Democratic support to sustain a veto if Congress votes to reject the Iran nuclear deal. 

In response to a question about whether a veto could be sustained, Lew noted that he’d heard a number of positive comments from Democrats during a press breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor.

“What I’ve heard from those who are actually listening to arguments … I think enough for this to be sustained,” Lew told reporters.

The administration has been engaged in a full-court press to convince members of Congress to accept the deal, or at least not override a presidential veto in the case that Congress passes a resolution disapproving the deal.

Those remarks came as the White House lost at least one House Democrat on Wednesday. 

Rep. Grace Meng (N.Y.) said the “deal before us now is simply too dangerous for the American people.” 

“I strongly believe the world could and should have a better deal than that set forth in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which I will therefore oppose,” said Meng, who is a member of the Foreign Affairs subcommittee on the Middle East. 

Meng added that she would continue to study the finer points of the deal, but said, “they will not be dispositive for me.”

MULLAH OMAR REPORTEDLY DEAD: Afghanistan’s government is investigating fresh claims that Taliban leader Mullah Omar has died, multiple news outlets are reporting.

Sources told the BBC on Wednesday that the militant chief died two to three years ago. The BBC said that multiple Afghan administration and intelligence agency officials had claimed Omar is dead.

The Taliban has neither confirmed nor denied those reports, the news outlet added.

A spokesman for Afghan President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani said that authorities were working to verify reports of Omar’s death.

“As soon as we get more authentication … we’re going to let the media and people of Afghanistan know about that,” said Sayed Zafar Hashemi, according to the BBC.

“We do believe the reports of his death are credible,” White House spokesman Eric Schultz told reporters Wednesday afternoon, adding that the White House is not yet ready to confirm Omar’s death.

Omar seemingly last issued a public statement in mid-July in support of peace talks between Ghani’s administration and the Taliban.

ICYMI: 

— McCain denies trying to freeze out Cruz

— Five things to know about Mullah Omar

— Senators unveil bill to block ISIS from profiting off antiquities

— Poll finds growing opposition to Iran deal

— Defense bill at an impasse, but a solution is within reach