Iran took center stage on the Sunday talk shows this morning on the eve of tomorrow night’s foreign policy debate, with Obama campaign senior adviser touting President Obama’s Iran policy during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” with David Gregory.
Axelrod praised the President for uniting the world behind sanctions against the Islamic republic, noting that the Iranian economy had been brought “to its knees.”
“There is tremendous disquiet in Iran,” Axelrod said. “Their currency has dropped in value by 50 percent; their oil business has dropped in value by 50 percent.
“There is restiveness in their political environment,” Axelrod continued. “But if they are sensible they will look at that and set aside their nuclear ambitions.”
Nontheless, Axelrod’s description of the dire situation created by the sanctions fails to mention that the Iranian regime remains undeterred in its race to get nuclear weapons despite the sanctions.
A recent study by the Congressional Research Service found that the sanctions are hurting the average Iranian more than Iran’s nuclear program.
“Department of Defense and other assessments indicate that sanctions have not stopped Iran from building up its conventional military and missile capabilities, in large part with indigenous skills,” the CRS report said. “
Holes in the Obama sanctions regime remain, such as the exemption granted to China’s continued importation of Iranian oil, which the CRS says is due to the nation’s close economic relationship with China. Other holes include allowing foreign subsidiaries of American companies to trade with Iran.
“…[T]here is not clear evidence that sanctions are slowing Iran’s program. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports have consistently said that Iran’s stockpile of low-enriched uranium—and its capacity to enrich uranium—continues to expand, as do its holdings of 20% enriched uranium,” CRS writes.
Asked by Gregory about the significance of today’s New York Times report suggesting that Iran has agreed to nuclear talks, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) dismissed the report noting that
Iran has used prior talks to stall for time.
“No one wants a war. We would hope we could resolve this in another way,” Rubio said. “I think the military option has to be on the table.”
“The White House is denying [the New York Times] story this morning, so there really is not much to talk about.”
Mitt Romney is open to having direct talks with Iran about its nuclear program, according to Rubio.
But Rubio predicts that a Romney administration would lead the way on sanctions and increase pressure on Russia and other countries to participate in those sanctions.
“I think a president with a clear vision of what he wants to ultimately accomplish, and that’s preventing a nuclear capacity, a nuclear weapons capacity by Iran may actually help that process along,” Rubio said.
While Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) suggested he was disturbed by the New York Times report because a shift to one-on-one talks with Iran would abandon our allies who have been involved in nuclear talks with the Islamic republic until now.
“Some of these allies have been more forward than we’ve been about being sure that the sanctions were tough and put in place,” Portman said.
The White House said in a statement, however, that that it has no plans to abandon the multilateral talks Iran after the election despite The New York Times‘s claim to the contrary.
