Posted By Josh Rogin Share

House and Senate leaders are meeting this week behind closed doors to work out language for new sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran (CBI), and the administration is  pressing key Democrats hard to adopt their position, which aims to weaken the sanctions measures.

The debate is taking place as part of the negotiations over the fiscal 2012 defense authorization bill, which passed both the House and the Senate and is in conference right now. The legislation will probably emerge from conference next week and pass both chambers, at which point President Barack Obama will be under heavy pressure to sign the "must pass" defense bill, with whatever Iran sanctions language the conferees agree on.

The current sanctions language at the center of the closed door debate is the amendment by Sens. Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ), which passed the Senate by a rare 100-0 vote over the very public objections of top Obama administration officials. The amendment would direct the Obama administration to take punitive measures against foreign banks that do business with the CBI, but gives the administration more leeway to implement the sanctions than Kirk's original language.

The administration urged Kirk and Menendez to come up with a compromise amendment but then came out against that very compromise last week, angering and alienating Menendez, who needs to be tough on the issue ahead of his re-election bid next year. The Cable has obtained the administration's private communications to the conferees spelling out the changes they want to the Kirk-Menendez amendment; they can be found here and here.

Basically, the administration wants to delay the implementation of sanctions not related to oil purchases from 60 to 180 days, and wants to water down the severity of sanctions measures if and when they are put into effect.

Initially, the administration turned to House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking Democrat Howard Berman (D-CA) to help them with the changes. Berman, who is inside the closed conference, initially indicated that he wanted to work with the administration to change the Kirk-Menendez amendment.

But Berman also has a tough reelection fight coming up against Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), who he must face after their districts were combined, and he can't afford to seem weak on Iran. Today, Berman announced that he does not want to want to water down the Kirk-Menendez language at all. In fact, he said he wants to strengthen it.

"Every administration wants total discretion on foreign policy, but that is an impulse that Congress must always resist," Berman said at a conference on Thursday sponsored by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), a conservative policy and research organization. Berman spoke just after a panel on Syria, moderated by your humble Cable guy.

"I will not, and Congress should not, give into entreaties from the administration or elsewhere ... to dilute our approach to sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran's petroleum transactions," Berman said to applause. "The Kirk-Menendez amendment is a good amendment."

Berman said the only change he wants to the Kirk-Menendez amendment is to shorten the administration's window for implementing sanctions on those who do oil business with the CBI from 180 days, as the Kirk-Menendez bill specifies, to 120 days.

Sherman, in a Thursday interview with The Cable, accused Berman of flip-flopping on the issue and said the Kirk-Menendez language should be sent to Obama's desk exactly as it is.

"Berman was helping the administration and now he's made a 180 degree change, which is good," Sherman said.

"We need to protect the Menendez-Kirk language," he said, making sure to name the Democrat first. "The White House doesn't want to do it. And the White House will be trying to stop the Menendez-Kirk amendment from being in legislation that the president has to sign."

Having lost Berman, the administration then turned to other senior Democrats to carry its water inside the conference. We're told by a senior GOP congressional aide close to the conference negotiations that House Armed Services ranking Democrat Adam Smith (D-WA) and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) are now arguing inside the conference for changes to the Kirk-Menendez amendment to satisfy the administration's concerns.

"Right now the Republicans want to adopt the Menendez/Kirk amendment while the Democrats, specifically Congressman Smith and Senator Levin, are working to incorporate the Obama administration's changes even though Senator Levin already voted for the current language," the aide said. "At some point enough is enough - Let's send it to the President's desk for signature as it is."

The administration has argued publicly that the Kirk-Menendez amendment could alienate foreign countries, make it more difficult to form an international coalition to pressure Iran, and raise oil prices, which could actually help the Iranian economy. They have argued in private meetings with lawmakers that the effort could hurt the U.S. economy.

Supporters of the Kirk-Menendez amendment point to an extensive report on CBI sanctions compiled in the midst of the negotiations by the FDD.  

"The (once) confidential report was provided to the administration and select members of Congress during the discussions on the Menendez-Kirk Central Bank amendment," FDD's Mark Dubowitz told The Cable. "The report concluded that, even if the Saudis did not release additional oil supplies, it was still possible to reduce Iran's oil revenues without spooking oil markets and driving up the price of oil."

Sherman's view on that tension is shared by most lawmakers. "You can't stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon without breaking some eggs," he said.

 

MITTAL

1:28 AM ET

December 9, 2011

just like supercommitte's dismal failure

Congress = inaction, ineptitude, imbecile

Congress = set up to fail

Congress = talk talk talk till nothing happens always with any kind of luck at al

end of story, tomorrow never come, all living in dream land

 

MARK REED

8:45 AM ET

December 9, 2011

Iran failed sanctions

SILENCE IS CONSENT

The Most Shocking 30 Second Ad of the Year

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ch1rq_liTs
VISIT US AT: www.markreedforcongress.com EMAIL: info@markreedforcongress.com

Why such an ad? Did it make you think?

IF SO FORWARD TO ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS!

Israel’s very existence is threatened and the current administration continues to treat it and its Prime Minister not as close allies but as insignificant. Now, Brad Sherman and Howard Berman, my two opponents in the upcoming primary for California’s 30th District Congressional seat, are both quietly distancing themselves from the very same person they helped elect -- only to get themselves re-elected!

I’m not challenging their support for, or emotional connection to, Israel; however, I want you to take a serious look at their silence concerning the Middle East and the State of Israel, our only true friend in the region. I would speak loudly and clearly in opposition to:

The Palestinian Authority’s Resolution for state recognition to the U.N.
President Obama’s demand for Israel to return to the 1967 borders.
The growing dominance of the Muslim Brotherhood in the region.
The spread of Sharia Law in the region and in the United States.
The failure of the sanctions imposed on Iran and North Korea.
The Democrat endorsement of the Anti-Semitic J Street lobbyist group (including the personal endorsement by Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz).
The support for multinational resolutions to strip Israel of nuclear weapons.
The refusal to approve any major Israeli request for U.S. weapons platforms or advanced systems.
The sale of such systems to Muslim nations which do not have a viable peace treaty with Israel.
President Obama’s treatment of Prime Minister Netanyahu during his first visit to the White House.
The condemnation of settlement building in Ramat Shlomo, the Jewish suburb of North Jerusalem.
President Obama’s obsequious bowing to Muslim leaders.
President Obama’s sacrifice of U.S.-Israeli relations.
President Obama’s failure to visit Israel.
This list could go on forever.

The final question you need to ask yourself is whether you will be better off if you send Sherman and Berman back to Washington, D.C. to represent us. The existential threat portrayed in my ad is real. And the horrific outcome portrayed has a far greater likelihood of becoming real if we do not change course. We need to send these two rubber stamps home and elect a representative that will lead and not follow their party dictates.

That is why I produced this ad. I am not afraid to represent you in Washington, D.C. and challenge my party when the time calls for it.

If this is what you want, please forward this email to everyone you know nationally and internationally. Contribute what you can so that, together, we can send a strong message.

God Bless you and God Bless America,

Mark Reed

VISIT US AT: www.markreedforcongress.com EMAIL: info@markreedforcongress.com

 

John Hudson reports on national security and foreign policy from the Pentagon to Foggy Bottom, the White House to Embassy Row, for The Cable.

Enter your email address to get The Cable delivered to your inbox each night:

Delivered by FeedBurner