Sen. Lieberman, Director Hayden Pan Iran Nuke Deal on Capitol Hill

Former Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman and Former CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden both unloaded on the Obama Administration’s nuclear agreement with Iran today, at a hearing of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

The hearing began with Chairman Ed Royce and Congressman Deutch setting the tone by highlighting a number of key issues they saw in the agreement. These issues included a continuation of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) possession and the lifting of the UN arms embargo, the process and fluidity of IAEA inspections of Iranian nuclear sites, lack of clarity regarding Iran’s past nuclear activity, monetary incentives that Iran could use for sponsoring terrorism, and the four American citizens that are still being held hostage in Iran.

Lieberman, in his opening statement, described what he saw as a bad deal with the  “anti-American, anti-Israel, and anti-Sunni”, Islamic Republic of Iran. Lieberman pointed out how the Obama administration’s “when necessary” inspections of Iranian nuclear sites were a far cry from the “anytime, anywhere” inspections that the administration had promised legislators concerned about verification, and far less than the “air tight” verification regime that was necessary for a regime like Iran which had “delayed and deceived” for so long.. Lieberman also took issue with the Administration’s talking point that “a vote against this deal is a vote for war” saying:

“Rejecting this bad deal will not result in war or the collapse of diplomacy, but will give the administration a chance to pursue better deal… In the end, the best you can do is decide in the privacy of own conscience what is best for the security of the American people. This is a decision that will affect the rest of our lives.”

Mr. Lieberman also noted that the agreement essentially permitted Iran to become a nuclear weapons power at some point in the future, and noted there was no reason to believe that Iran would uphold the supposed ten year waiting period, which the Iranians were likely to use to increase their knowledge and development of nuclear technology. Lieberman also explicitly called on all of those officials involved in this agreement to remember the large amounts of American blood the Iranian regime has on its hands. Lieberman reminded the Committee that while Iran may present Foreign Minister Zarif and President Hassan Rouhani as reformed and reasonable leaders, the the real leadership of the Iranian regime remains the Supreme Ayatollah and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Former CIA Director General Michael Hayden also noted that the problematic nature of the negotiations began with the regime continuing to maintain revolutionary ambitions. Hayden noted that Iran “wanted to be a country” but stilled considered itself  “a cause”. Hayden also rejected comparisons being made to  START treaty between the US and USSR from the early 1990s, the equivalence between two perceived superpowers, the U.S. and the Soviet Union, did not exist between the US and Iran. Hayden also noted that if the agreement was passed, as is, Iran would be more capable than ever before to continue a policy of sponsoring terrorism, fomenting anti-American and anti-Israeli rhetoric, following the inflow of billions in monetary incentives and the easing of comprehensive sanctions.The former CIA Director also questioned the wisdom of relying on IAEA verification when Iran had been successfully “stiffing” the international agency for years. Hayden noted that what should have been a technical question of verification, driven by the IAEA’s data needs, was now a process which would be politicized.

Today marks the first in what will likely be numerous many Congressional hearings on the proposed nuclear deal between the United States and Iran, as legislators seek to take stock of whether the Obama Administration had upheld promises related to verification, the ability to “snapback” sanctions passed by Congress, and whether the deal delays, or hastens Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. Congress has 60 days to consider whether to pass a motion of disapproval against the deal.