Sunday, March 29, 2015

5 + 1

For John, BLUFIt is better to be talking than to be fighting, as Winston Churchill pointed out.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

Remember the Fabled 47 Senators and their "Open Letter" to the Iranian Leadership?  The ones who brought down some much hate and discontent on their heads?  Logan Act and all that?  Turns out they are not President Obama's biggest problem in cutting some sort of a nuclear deal with Iran.  No, that would be French President Hollande.

From The Daly Mail (London) the other day we have "France tells UN 'insufficient' progress in Iran nuclear talks".  Wait—This isn't just between the US Administration and the Iranians?  Apparently not in the mind of Reporter Michelle Nichols.  The lede:

France warned on Tuesday that "insufficient" progress has been made toward a nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers with specific disparities over research and development and the issue of sanctions.

"Iran must now make difficult choices if it truly wishes to regain the trust of the international community," French U.N. Ambassador Francois Delattre told a United Nations Security Council meeting on U.N. sanctions on Iran.

Apparently it isn't all about SecState John Forbes Kerry and President Obama.

And, there is the issue of how this and other such Executive Agreements are changing the nature of our Constitution.  I put a lot of this on Congress.

The idea that the Administration will launder this Agreement through the United Nations to avoid Senate approval and perhaps Congressional oversight strikes me as wrong.  It is transforming how we do foreign policy, and maybe domestic policy, without the consent of Congress.

Regards  —  Cliff

  The ones who I said the whiners should DEMAND indictments under the Logan Act?


lance said...

One would believe that Hollande is acting in national interest, but we can't say the same thing about your 47 senators who were acting in their own political interest, and in undermining the President perhaps acting against OUR national interests. And that kind of action is often called what?

C R Krieger said...

Or they were acting in our national interest and the President, mistakenly, is not.  Being President is not the same as being right.  That said, I think the President is right to engage in negotiations, but it is possible he will be snookered in these negotiations.  That would be unfortunate.  However, back to the Fabled 47, to suggest they are unpatriotic is an unfortunate articulation.

Regards  —  Cliff