For 35 years, the United States' relationship with Iran has been frozen in amber, locked in a series of proxy wars and covert struggles. Circumstances have occasionally thrust us together, like our shared actions against the Taliban after 9/11 or, more recently, working together against some of the most barbarous forces in the Middle East. Now, no one is under any illusions that the military leadership and hard-line clerics are bad actors opposed to the United States, but that is only part of the story of a complex narrative. The new and potentially more significant chapter of that relationship is an effort to contain Iran's nuclear ambition, not through force, but a combination of tough, multinational sanctions and diplomacy. This all started in the Bush administration a decade ago and has continued. Congress is now beginning the analysis of this historic agreement. For the first time, Iran's nuclear activities have been reined in. They have followed what they said they would do for the last 2 years. For the first time in history, we have an agreement that would last for a decade or more, reached not just by the United States alone--we could not have done this alone--but with all five members of the U.N. Security Council, Germany, and the cooperation of potential consumers of Iranian oil like India and Japan. Now, we must be prepared to hear people, starting with Prime Minister Netanyahu, attack it.…
Share
More from Earl Blumenauer
I have a strong belief in the power of international trade agreements to make a profound difference. It is not just because 95 percent of the global economy is outside the United States. These agreements are necessary to raise standards…
I urge the Biden administration to resist any efforts from our trading partners... to agree to outcomes that do not fully reflect American interests.
I am assuming that both of you are very careful to make sure that you meet your tax obligations.
Had I been present for the vote today on Roll Call No. 221, Ordering the Previous Question on H. Res. 1243, I would have voted NAY. Had I been present for the vote on Roll Call No. 222, H. Res. 1243, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been…





