The Hill – July 16, 2015 – Lawmakers are just beginning what’s likely to be a polarized debate over the controversial nuclear deal. Congress has the power to reject the deal, but that would have to overcome a presidential veto, meaning two-thirds of Congress would have to band together against it.
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) pushed back against the idea that Republicans don’t support diplomacy, arguing that the terms simply amounted to a bad deal. He noted that the deal allows for a delay before monitors are able to access potentially secret nuclear sites, and expressed concerns about agreeing to lift arms and ballistic missile embargoes down the road if Iran follows the agreement.
“This is a country that terrorizes the region already and we are going to make it easier for them to do that by lifting the sanctions and giving them tens of billions of dollars, in addition to now having access to the arms that would enable them to do that,” he said.
Thune added that he’s approaching the deal with a “high level of skepticism” and said that his party isn’t against diplomacy, only weak diplomacy.
“It’s got to be strong diplomacy and strong leadership. But that opportunity may have been lost, that window might have closed,” he said.
“The next president is going to have to manage nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, and that’s essentially going to be the legacy of what this deal is.”
