Steve Bannon’s Attack on the Iran Nuclear Agreement

Abcarian: Steve Bannon discovers the hard way that defying Congress is no joke

On Wednesday, I asked Steve Bannon if he was planning an attack on the Obama-era nuclear accord with Iran.

If he was, he didn’t tell anyone. Not even Jared Kushner, who’s planning to unveil the Iran deal to the American people on January 8th.

Instead, Bannon tweeted, “Congress shouldn’t make another unilateral commitment to Iran.” He followed it up by claiming that the deal “isn’t about regime change. It’s about Iran complying with its international obligations.” It’s not clear if he was speaking for himself or his former boss, President Trump.

Bannon didn’t respond to the fact that the deal requires congressional approval. Nor did he mention that if it were passed on the administration’s watch, it would constitute a full-scale breach of the agreement. And this is what has led him to question the validity of the deal.

In June, he tweeted that “the US will be leaving the Iran nuclear deal in a few months (probably sooner)!” In July, he tweeted that the pact is “f—ing up the world for good.” And he’s now asked, “is it time to re-open the Iran nuclear deal?”

Is it time to re-open the Iran deal?

The deal is officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), but most of the world refers to it as the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015.

It’s a short-term arrangement that lasted for about one year. But during that time, it became a permanent law of the United States, as all such laws must be — they create binding international obligations. In short, it was a treaty that made Washington the only country in the world legally required to verify the veracity of Iran’s compliance with the nuclear accord.

Trump has described the deal as a “terrible” one, and he has vowed to tear it up. But as the agreement enters its second anniversary this week, it continues to do what it was designed to do, as an enduring legal agreement that protects the United States from the potential geopolitical fallout of any future nuclear agreement with

Leave a Comment