Activists Skeptical About Diplomacy With Iran

By Nathan Guttman

Published October 07, 2009, issue of October 16, 2009.
  • Print
  • Share Share

Reports on progress made in recent diplomatic talks with Iran have left some Jewish activists playing a kind of Greek chorus, expressing skepticism on the sidelines while not interrupting the ongoing drama.

Many of these activists have been gearing up for a push toward tough sanctions against Tehran to curb its nuclear ambitions, and are now worried that the October 1 negotiations between Iran and a group of six nations, including the United States, will mistakenly be viewed as progress. Jewish activists are concerned that the talks will serve as a delay tactic by Tehran — a concern echoed by some key members of Congress who seem to be increasingly impatient with the Islamic Republic.

In the talks, Iran proposed to ship its Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) to Russia and France for enrichment and production of nuclear fuel. That fuel would later be returned to Iran for non-military use. Iran also reportedly agreed to allow inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency to visit its secretly-kept nuclear facility near the city of Qom. Iranian negotiators, however, turned down the American deadline of performing the inspections within two weeks and insisted on a three-week timeframe.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee noted, in an October 5 memo that Iran’s move “does nothing to comply with U.N. Security Council resolutions.” The group stressed that Iran, according to multiple resolutions adopted by the Security Council, must fully suspend uranium enrichment, allow inspections of all nuclear facilities, come clean on all covert nuclear activity it might have, and reveal all nuclear sites. AIPAC argued that if Iran does not adhere to all these requirements “America and its allies must impose crippling sanctions on the regime.”

These crippling sanctions can come from two possible sources. The Security Council could pass another resolution, and Congress can move forward on legislation aimed at preventing Iran from importing refined petroleum products, a move that experts say will severely hurt Iran’s economy.

While pushing sanctions in the United Nations is solely in the hands of the Obama administration, Congress is free to decide independently on unilateral legislation imposing sanctions in Iran. Thus far, the administration has been holding back Congress, but the September 25 revelation of the secret Qom facility made the White House more open to the possibility of sanctions, according to a congressional staff member.

An October 5 hearing in the Senate Banking Committee illustrated that some members of Congress are feeling pressed to take action — and pressing the administration, in return.

In a heated exchange during the hearing, Florida Dem. Robert Menendez demanded to know the administration’s benchmarks to measure progress in the talks with Iran. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg replied that if Iran actually ships out its LEU, that would be “a tangible sign of progress.” Menendez pressed the administration official and warned the clock is ticking. Steinberg tried to ease lawmakers’ concerns by making clear that while the administration does not want to “interrupt this progress” in negotiations with Iran, it will not allow talks “to drag out indefinitely.”

Lawmakers sponsoring the key pieces of legislation imposing sanctions on Iran have inched closer in recent weeks to getting their bills approved. Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in mid-September that “absent some compelling evidence as to why I should do otherwise, I will mark up my bill next month and begin the process of tightening the screws on Tehran.” A committee spokeswoman said Berman’s view remains unchanged even after the October 1 talks, but no date for markup has been set.

Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, made clear in the October 5 hearing that he, too, is ready to move on a sanctions bill that would include measures targeting Iran’s refined petroleum imports, as well as its central bank. “Congress must equip President Obama with a full range of tools to deal with the threats posed by Iran,” Dodd said in a prepared statement.

Contact Nathan Guttman at

Find us on Facebook!
  • Yeshiva University's lawyer wanted to know why the dozens of former schoolboys now suing over a sexual abuse cover-up didn't sue decades ago. Read the judge's striking response here.
  • It’s over. The tyranny of the straight-haired, button nosed, tan-skinned girl has ended. Jewesses rejoice!
  • It's really, really, really hard to get kicked out of Hebrew school these days.
  • "If Netanyahu re-opens the settlement floodgates, he will recklessly bolster the argument of Hamas that the only language Israel understands is violence."
  • Would an ultra-Orthodox leader do a better job of running the Met Council?
  • So, who won the war — Israel or Hamas?
  • 300 Holocaust survivors spoke out against Israel. Did they play right into Hitler's hands?
  • Ari Folman's new movie 'The Congress' is a brilliant spectacle, an exhilarating visual extravaganza and a slapdash thought experiment. It's also unlike anything Forward critic Ezra Glinter has ever seen.
  • The eggplant is beloved in Israel. So why do Americans keep giving it a bad rap? With this new recipe, Vered Guttman sets out to defend the honor of her favorite vegetable.
  • “KlezKamp has always been a crazy quilt of gay and straight, religious and nonreligious, Jewish and gentile.” Why is the klezmer festival shutting down now?
  • “You can plagiarize the Bible, can’t you?” Jill Sobule says when asked how she went about writing the lyrics for a new 'Yentl' adaptation. “A couple of the songs I completely stole." Share this with the theater-lovers in your life!
  • Will Americans who served in the Israeli army during the Gaza operation face war crimes charges when they get back home?
  • Talk about a fashion faux pas. What was Zara thinking with the concentration camp look?
  • “The Black community was resistant to the Jewish community coming into the neighborhood — at first.” Watch this video about how a group of gardeners is rebuilding trust between African-Americans and Jews in Detroit.
  • "I am a Jewish woman married to a non-Jewish man who was raised Catholic, but now considers himself a “common-law Jew.” We are raising our two young children as Jews. My husband's parents are still semi-practicing Catholics. When we go over to either of their homes, they bow their heads, often hold hands, and say grace before meals. This is an especially awkward time for me, as I'm uncomfortable participating in a non-Jewish religious ritual, but don't want his family to think I'm ungrateful. It's becoming especially vexing to me now that my oldest son is 7. What's the best way to handle this situation?" What would you do?
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?

We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.