The 112th Congress and Iran

08 January 2011 | 00:05 Code : 9920 General category

Hooman Majd

The 112^th Congress of American republic began its first session on January 5^th, 2011, presided over by a new Republican Speaker, the almost comically lachrymose and perpetually tanned John Boehner. The new Congress, like almost all that preceded it, is focused mostly on domestic affairs, and in an era of partisanship and even extreme hatred of President Obama (seemingly for no reason other than he is Obama), Boehner has promised that Congress will prioritize repealing the health care bill (which will unlikely have enough support in the still Democrat-controlled Senate, and without a two-thirds Republican majority in Congress no chance to override a presidential veto), cutting federal spending, and challenging Obama on policies intended to strengthen the economy and create jobs. What is evident is that President Obama will face a far more hostile House for the next two years, one that he will have to maneuver around and compromise with in order to get anything done in the remaining years of his first term in office, and his choice of William Daley as his new Chief of Staff reflects the White House’s continuing concern with the economy as well as its commitment to bipartisanship. Less clear to some foreign observers is how the new Congress will affect U.S. foreign policy, and in particular the pressing issues of Iran’s nuclear program, the Palestinian-Israeli peace process, and the conduct of the war in Afghanistan.

Foreign policy is within the purview of the executive branch of government, and major policy decisions are made at the White House. (The last Senate may have held up Obama’s ambassador to Syria appointment, among others, but he was able to send an ambassador to Damascus anyway, using his powers to make a recess appointment at the end of the year.) As such, it is unlikely that the Obama administration’s foreign policy will change much, even with a Congress controlled by the opposition party. The new chairwoman of Congress’ powerful Committee on Foreign Affairs, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, is clearly a vigorous opponent of Iran and a diehard supporter of Israel, and she intends to challenge the administration on its Iran policy as well its position on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict by calling hearings and grilling administration officials, introducing anti-Iran bills, and generally making news as well as a nuisance of herself (while greatly pleasing her supporters at AIPAC, the most powerful Israeli lobby in the U.S.). But Ms. Ros-Lehtinen does not have the ability to make policy, nor does she control the purse strings in Congress, and while President Obama will be under more pressure to take a harder line on Iran, express more support for Israel and to continue US policy of refusing to engage with Hamas or Hezbollah, he will not be bound by the Committee’s findings. Naturally, Obama will need the support of Congress on other issues, and foreign affairs could potentially fall victim to compromise on what the White House may consider more pressing matters (or vice versa, as in the tax cut extension at the end of 2010 and the ratification of the START treaty).

Ros-Lehtinen was quoted in December as saying that “Iran is number one, number two and number three" on the House Foreign Affairs Committee to-do list, which might, I suppose, mean that Turkey and Syria, other targets of Ros-Lehtinen’s ire, may relax for the moment, but her chairmanship shouldn’t raise too much concern in Tehran, either. To-do list? As in, to do exactly what? Impose additional sanctions or tighten existing ones? Go to war? Remove the Mujaheddin-e-Khalq from the U.S. terrorist list as some of her equally uninformed colleagues would like to? Impose a total embargo on Iran, much like the one on her native Cuba, which must’ve, uniquely in her mind, been fabulously successful in changing Fidel’s mind these past fifty years? Make regime-change in Iran the official policy of the United States? Ros-Lehtinen may wish for all those things, but she will not be in a position to actually bring them about. Obama will be under pressure to publicly take a harder line on Iran, particularly in the case of expanding sanctions in the event talks over the nuclear issue go nowhere, but there was never an indication that he or anyone in the administration would suddenly go soft on Iran, not after two years of escalating pressure spearheaded by Iran hawks in the administration who include Stuart Levey at Treasury, Dennis Ross at the White House, and Hillary Clinton at State.

There is no doubt that the make up of the 112^th Congress, with its Tea Party representatives and Republican majority in the House, presents a challenge to Obama—mostly on domestic affairs but also to some extent in foreign affairs—just as the White House turns its focus to his re-election campaign, which will begin in a year or even sooner. In foreign affairs, Mr. Obama is most vulnerable on Iran (for he has bipartisan support for his Iraq and Afghanistan policies and Americans hardly expect a breakthrough in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict anytime soon). Yes, Iran may end up number one, two, and three on Mr. Obama’s to-do list too, and his list is more important than any Ros-Lehtinen draws up. Republicans, and certainly hardliners such as Ros-Lehtinen, will continue to make Iran an issue of security for Americans, and if Obama’s two track policy—engagement and increasing pressure—bears no fruit, he will face tough questions not just from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, but from a Republican presidential candidate seeking to unseat him. As such, Iran is in a strong position to resolve the nuclear crisis before the U.S. presidential election in 2012 on terms favorable to it. Hillary Clinton hinted as much in December of 2010, indicating that uranium enrichment on Iranian soil, the intractable sticking point in negotiations so far, may be accepted by the West at some point in the future. The Iranian leadership might consider focusing less on the pressure exerted on it by Western powers and the words and actions of hostile Congressional leaders, and more on the engagement that Obama promises to continue. Iran may also want to avoid giving excuses to the likes of Ros-Lehtinen, or Senators Lieberman and McCain and some of their colleagues, by refraining from belligerent rhetoric and actions that can put Iran in a negative light. As disappointing as the Obama administration’s Iran policy has been to Iranians (and to some Americans who oppose his stubborn adherence to a “carrots and sticks” philosophy), resolving the nuclear issue—which will certainly benefit Iran—will be less painful with Obama in the White House than with any of the other potential presidential candidates looking to replace him in 2012. At a minumum, the upcoming Istanbul talks between Iran and the P5+1, Obama, the 112^th Congress, and the presidential campaign of 2012, provide food for thought in Tehran.