Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton embraced a landmark nuclear deal with Iran on Tuesday, calling it the most effective path for the US to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. But she warned it would need strict enforcement, underscoring the tension between President Barack Obama’s foreign policy legacy and the White House aspirations of his first secretary of state.
In a lengthy statement released late Tuesday, Clinton said she supported “the agreement because it can help us prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.”
But her written statement, following a day of meetings with Democratic lawmakers in Congress, also called for a “clear-eyed” assessment of the threat Iran represents to the US If elected, she vowed a tough response if Iran failed to live up to its end of the bargain.
“We can never permit Iran to evade its obligations or to place any suspicious site off limits to inspectors,” Clinton wrote. “And the response to any cheating must be immediate and decisive – starting with the return of sanctions but taking no options off the table, including, if necessary, our military options.”
- Iran says US sanctions intended to derail efforts to save nuclear deal
- What Donald Trump’s pullout from Iran deal means for India
- What is the Iran nuclear Deal?
- Donald Trump withdraws US from Iran nuclear deal: All you need to know
- Benjamin Netanyahu told Donald Trump about Iran claims in March: senior official
- Clinton welcomes passage of Iran sanctions act by the Congress
Clinton has largely supported the Obama administration’s negotiations over the past two years. She has stayed involved with their progress with regular briefings, according to aides who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to publicly discuss private meetings.
But navigating the political nuances of a historic agreement with a decades-long U.S. enemy heading into a presidential election year may end up being far more complicated.
On Tuesday, Republican candidates signaled that Clinton would be forced to defend her position in the 2016 race, warning of violent chaos in the Middle East and calling on Congress to try to halt the agreement.
“This isn’t diplomacy – it is appeasement,” said former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, one of the many Republicans who lashed out at the agreement.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said the bargain “will be remembered as one of America’s worst diplomatic failures.” Florida Sen. Marco Rubio _ who, like Walker, has vowed to rescind the agreement should he be elected president, said: “I believe this deal undermines our national security.”
Though a slim majority of Americans back diplomacy with Iran, 56 percent consider Iran an enemy of the US, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.
Israeli leaders – who hold sway with some Jewish voters – see the agreement as a threat to their country’s very existence. And Republicans have already spent months trying to link Clinton to Obama, who has seen approval ratings for his foreign policy sink in his second term.
Clinton’s current place in the Iran debate marks a striking role reversal for the second-time presidential candidate and her long ago rival. In 2008, she called Obama’s offer to meet with Iran’s leader without preconditions “irresponsible and, frankly, naive.” And when Clinton said she would “obliterate” Iran if the country used nuclear weapons against Israel, Obama likened her “bluster” to the “tough talk” of then-President George W. Bush.
Four years later, as secretary of state, Clinton dispatched a top adviser, Jake Sullivan, to participate in the secret meetings with Iran through the sultan of Oman that led to the start of the international negotiations.
Sullivan, who could serve as Clinton’s national security adviser if she’s elected, declined to speak for Clinton during a breakfast with reporters. When asked for his own views, Sullivan said, “I believe that this deal is the best and most effective way to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. That’s my personal view.”
Clinton, however, has long wondered publicly whether a deal would ever take shape. She told an American Jewish organization last year that she was “skeptical the Iranians will follow through and deliver.” She said she had “seen many false hopes dashed through the years.”
Now, skeptical congressional Democrats are looking to Clinton for direction as they weigh the completed agreement. With the deal between the world powers now finalized, Congress has 60 days to assess the accord and decide whether to pursue legislation imposing new sanctions on Iran or try to prevent Obama from suspending existing ones. If Clinton wins the White House, her commitment to implementing the agreement will play a huge factor in its potential success.
Though Clinton praised the deal, she warned that the agreement would not end Iran’s “bad behavior” in the region, such as sponsoring terrorists, and noted that the country remains a major threat to Israel.
The Democratic Senate leader, Sen. Harry Reid, said Clinton had told the rank-and-file privately “let’s find out for sure what’s in it.”