For decades, both Republicans and Democrats assumed tensions with Russia had more to do with their predecessors in the Oval Office than with the man sitting atop the Kremlin.
President George W. Bush, for example, looked into Vladimir Putin’s eyes and saw his soul. In hindsight, Bush probably just saw a smudge on Putin’s glasses. President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton believed all they needed was a “reset” to jump-start ties. President Donald Trump thought all his predecessors were wrong, that he was a man with whom Putin could do honest business.
The truth is Putin saw all his White House counterparts as fools. His goal was not peace and stability but an end to the post-World War II democratic order. If American politicos formed a circular firing squad every time Putin messed with one election or another, all the better. Putin’s main goals are to weaken America from within and to undermine confidence in democracy.
Failed outreach by both Democrats and Republicans, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and its growing threat to NATO provided an opportunity for a bipartisan moment. After all, few Democrats or Republicans wish to support Putin or fund Russia’s war machine. Unfortunately, Washington being Washington, the Democratic leadership’s inability to see good faith across the aisle now plays into Russia’s hands.
As part of the National Defense Authorization Act, Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN), introduced a number of amendments. Several of these tighten sanctions on Iran or impose checks and balances to ensure that there is real debate over any sanctions waivers. Others promote human rights, sanctioning the Office of the Supreme Leader, for example, for its role in human rights abuses. All of these are common sense and would enhance bipartisan faith in diplomacy rather than hamper it.
But rapprochement with Iran has become a religion among many liberals, no matter how reactionary the regime, and it appears that Democrats will vote against the Banks amendments on partisan lines.
This is a tragedy. Defending human rights against the backdrop of diplomacy is even more important given how executions and other human rights abuses skyrocket during periods of diplomacy and reform. This trend dates back to Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, whose call for a “Dialogue of Civilizations” the Clinton administration embraced. By increasing public executions while feigning outreach to the West, the Iranian leadership signals that reform is for external consumption only and that ordinary Iranians should have no such illusions. If Democrats are sincere about diplomacy, they should work with Republicans to counter its shortcomings.
Unfortunately, the blind embrace of Iran now extends to Russia. One of Banks’s amendments would terminate the president’s authority to waive sanctions on Russian persons and entities who work on Iran’s nuclear program. That makes sense and does more to cut off a revenue stream to Moscow than to help Iran. The entire bill, however, is important given national security adviser Jake Sullivan’s confirmation that Iran aims to provide drones to Russia. While far-left activists mandate that Democrats blame Trump for this development, the reality is that discussions between Tehran and Moscow about Iranian drone sales to Russia began during the Obama administration. To ease Iran’s financial recovery is to enable the Russo-Iranian alliance and undermine Ukraine.
Partisanship amplifies congressional battles, but it is important not to lose focus. Partisan rejection of commonsense Republican efforts to fix diplomacy will be no victory for the United States.
It is time for a bipartisan understanding that strategies that empower Russia are contrary to the interests of the U.S. To celebrate partisan victories at the expense of either the Ukrainian or Iranian peoples is nothing about which to feel proud.
Michael Rubin (@mrubin1971) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential. He is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
