State Department Spokesperson John Kirby on Wednesday laughed off a letter from 195 retired admirals and generals opposing the Iran nuclear agreement, and dodged questions about why letters of support for the deal being touted by the government should be believed when they have far fewer signatures on them than the letters opposing it.
The Obama administration had hyped a letter from three dozen retired admirals and generals in support of the deal, only to be trumped by a letter sent to Congress on Wednesday in which 195 retired admirals and generals rejected the deal. The administration also put out a letter from rabbis in favor of the deal, but opponents of the deal immediately followed suit with more than twice as many signatures against it.
“It’s getting to be kind of a weekly exercise … [F]irst the administration comes out and promotes a letter by a certain number of former or current officials, and then the opponents of the Iran deal come out with a larger number,” said Associated Press reporter Matt Lee.
Kirby laughed and seemed to reject the question by saying, “It’s not about the numbers, Matt.”
“It’s not?” asked Lee.
“It’s not about the numbers,” Kirby repeated with a sigh. “It is, however, about the facts and the merits of the deal. And so what I’d like to do is turn your question around a little bit and say it’s — what makes it — what makes the arguments for the deal more convincing than the arguments against the deal.”
“It’s not about the numbers of who supports it,” Kirby said after being pressed by Lee again. “And to pick a hundred of this type of person versus 50 of this person — it doesn’t — that’s not the relevant metric here. So let me just —”
If that’s not the relevant metric, why promote it in the first place, questioned Lee. Kirby said the Obama administration is merely trying to “point to those who are in favor of the deal” and “their expertise.”
“So the people that you got to sign your letter are more expert and are better qualified to comment on this than the much larger number that the opponents have gotten?” asked Lee.
Kirby, who is a retired two-star admiral, said there will always be “different voices” and opinions on the deal, and cited Secretary of State John Kerry’s belief and direct participation in the negotiations as proof that it is “a good deal.”
Kerry “helped negotiate this. And he believes … that the deal based on its merits — if you read it and you examine it factually, it is a good deal,” said Kirby. “If you examine the deal on its merits, you – the secretary believes you will see readily that it supports our national security interests and those of our allies and partners.”
The 195 retired admirals and generals against the Iran deal argued in their letter that the deal was “unverifiable” and “unconscionable.” It would give Iran $150 billion in sanctions relief, “threaten the national security” of the United States, and “enable Iran to become far more dangerous,” as well as “introduce new threats to American interests as well as our allies,” they wrote.
“In our professional opinion, far from being an alternative to war, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JPOA) makes it likely that the war the Iranian regime has waged against us since 1979 will continue, with far higher risks to our national security interests. Accordingly, we urge the Congress to reject this defective accord,” they wrote.
