Nuclear experts fall in behind Obama
Dozens of arms control and nuclear nonproliferation experts have signed a statement endorsing the Iran nuclear deal, the latest salvo in a lobbying campaign battle ahead of a congressional vote next month on President Barack Obama’s landmark agreement with Tehran.
The Arms Control Association, a nonpartisan group based in Washington, will release the statement Tuesday morning. It declares the deal limiting Iran’s nuclear program in return for sanctions relief “a net-plus for international nuclear nonproliferation efforts.”
Among the 75 signatories are the former CIA agent Valerie Plame and her husband, Joe Wilson, prominent opponents of the Iraq War. Others include Hans Blix, a former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Morton Halperin, a foreign policy veteran of three administrations; and Thomas Pickering, a retired diplomat and former U.S. ambassador to Israel.
Several former United Nations disarmament officials, along with leaders of think tanks and foundations dedicated to preventing the spread of nuclear arms, also added their names. Some of the signatories are already known supporters of the deal, which was struck in July.
Their message amplifies a core argument of the Obama administration: that the nuclear deal is well built and durable, and exceeds historical standards for arms control agreements.
If fulfilled by all parties, the statement says, the agreement “will reduce the risk of a destabilizing nuclear competition in a troubled region… and head off a catastrophic military conflict over Iran’s nuclear program.”
Amid a political uproar in Washington, the deal has mostly been celebrated by technical experts. Earlier this month, 29 prominent scientists wrote to Obama saying the deal has “more stringent constraints than any previously negotiated nonproliferation framework.”
But many critics of the deal, led by Republicans in Congress and Israeli officials, argue that it is filled with dangerous loopholes and concessions. They have focused, for instance, on a provision that could theoretically allow Iran to stall for up to 24 days before IAEA inspectors can examine a suspicious undeclared site
Dozens of arms control and nuclear nonproliferation experts have signed a statement endorsing the Iran nuclear deal, the latest salvo in a lobbying campaign battle ahead of a congressional vote next month on President Barack Obama’s landmark agreement with Tehran.
The Arms Control Association, a nonpartisan group based in Washington, will release the statement Tuesday morning. It declares the deal limiting Iran’s nuclear program in return for sanctions relief “a net-plus for international nuclear nonproliferation efforts.”
Among the 75 signatories are the former CIA agent Valerie Plame and her husband, Joe Wilson, prominent opponents of the Iraq War. Others include Hans Blix, a former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Morton Halperin, a foreign policy veteran of three administrations; and Thomas Pickering, a retired diplomat and former U.S. ambassador to Israel.
Several former United Nations disarmament officials, along with leaders of think tanks and foundations dedicated to preventing the spread of nuclear arms, also added their names. Some of the signatories are already known supporters of the deal, which was struck in July.
Their message amplifies a core argument of the Obama administration: that the nuclear deal is well built and durable, and exceeds historical standards for arms control agreements.
If fulfilled by all parties, the statement says, the agreement “will reduce the risk of a destabilizing nuclear competition in a troubled region… and head off a catastrophic military conflict over Iran’s nuclear program.”
Amid a political uproar in Washington, the deal has mostly been celebrated by technical experts. Earlier this month, 29 prominent scientists wrote to Obama saying the deal has “more stringent constraints than any previously negotiated nonproliferation framework.”
But many critics of the deal, led by Republicans in Congress and Israeli officials, argue that it is filled with dangerous loopholes and concessions. They have focused, for instance, on a provision that could theoretically allow Iran to stall for up to 24 days before IAEA inspectors can examine a suspicious undeclared site