![\"US-Senate-foreign-relations-committee-400\"](\"https:\/\/www.ncr-iran.org\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2016\/04\/US-Senate-foreign-relations-committee-400.jpg\" "\\"US-Senate-foreign-relations-committee-400\\"")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The Obama administration is open to renewing the Iran Sanctions Act, which expires at the end of 2016, if it does not interfere with the international nuclear agreement with Tehran, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Shannon said on Tuesday.<\/p>\n
“We would be happy to engage with this committee and the Congress on a renewed Iran Sanctions Act, assuming that it does not complicate or prevent us from meeting JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal) commitments,” he told a hearing of the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Reuters reported.<\/p>\n
The Iranian regime’s recent ballistic missile launches \u201cviolated the intent\u201d of a United Nations resolution, Shannon said at the hearing, according to The Hill.<\/p>\n
\u201cI believe it violated the intent of [U.N. Security Council Resolution] 2231.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhether our international lawyers will say it violated 2231, this is why we use the word inconsistent. But from our point of view, these launches are prohibited, and we\u2019re going to do everything we can to stop them.\u201d<\/p>\n
Iran’s regime launched multiple ballistic missiles on back-to-back days in March. The tests infuriated Republicans and some Democrats in the U.S. Congress, who said the move calls for a strong response from the United States.<\/p>\n
The Iranian regime\u2019s hardliners are doubling down on ballistic missiles after the nuclear deal, and as such, more launches are likely in the future, Shannon said.<\/p>\n
U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231, which was passed in July in support of the nuclear deal with Iran’s regime, says that, \u201cIran is called upon not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.\u201d<\/p>\n
Shannon\u2019s testimony is \u201cExhibit A\u201d in why there was concern about the nuclear agreement, said Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.).<\/p>\n
Sen. Corker also said he was disappointed that a letter from the United States, Britain, France and Germany to Spanish U.N. Ambassador Rom\u00e1n Oyarzun Marchesi and U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon didn\u2019t use the word “violation.”<\/p>\n
\u201cWe knew when the language said \u2018called upon\u2019 this situation would likely occur,\u201d Corker said. \u201cIt has. It\u2019s disappointing. I was disappointed that a letter from our European partners said it was \u2018inconsistent\u2019 and didn\u2019t say it was a \u2018violation.\u2019 Obviously, there was some wordsmithing taking place.\u201d<\/p>\n
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), ranking member of the committee, said the ballistic missiles should be a \u201crelatively easy\u201d issue.<\/p>\n
\u201cOn ballistic missiles, it seems to me this is a relatively easy matter working with the administration to have a statutory framework that goes beyond any one administration to make it clear we are going to take action against Iran,\u201d Cardin said.<\/p>\n
Corker and Cardin said they are working on legislation to sanction Iran’s regime in response to the tests and other destabilizing actions.<\/p>\n
The administration would support sanctions legislation, Shannon said, so long as it doesn\u2019t interfere with the nuclear deal.<\/p>\n
That position drew rebuke from Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), who said it walks back previous comments from the administration that Congress could pursue action against Iran’s regime outside of its nuclear portfolio.<\/p>\n
\u201cI see all of the cautionary remarks all of the time \u2014 I see all these caveats \u2014 I don\u2019t understand them,\u201d he said. \u201cWhat bothers me is we seem to create a permissive environment that is exemplified in the ballistic missile issues that have been raised.\u201d<\/p>\n
Shannon clarified that he didn\u2019t mean Congress could not act against the ballistic missile tests.<\/p>\n
\u201cMy purpose wasn\u2019t to say that are walking on eggshells with the Iranians,” he said.<\/p>\n
“My purpose was not to say that we are somehow pulling punches or somehow stepping away from pursuit of JCPOA commitments or, as you noted, broader understandings of concerns about Iran. That\u2019s not the case. We just want to make sure that as Iran meets its commitments, we meet our commitments.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Obama administration is open to renewing the Iran Sanctions Act, which expires at the end of 2016, if it does not interfere with the international nuclear agreement with Tehran, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25,"featured_media":45607,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[175],"class_list":{"0":"post-20127","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-iran-protests","8":"tag-updated"},"yoast_head":"\n