Debate Between Supporters and Opponents of Iran's Nuclear Agreement at Brookings Institution

As the voting process begins in the U.S. Congress regarding the nuclear agreement with Iran starting Tuesday, Washington, D.C. is witnessing numerous speeches and meetings featuring supporters and opponents of the agreement, including a debate at the Brookings Institution. Republican Senator John McCain from Arizona and critic and researcher Leon Wieseltier represented the opponents of the nuclear agreement, while Susan Maloney, Deputy Director of Foreign Policy Programs at Brookings, and Bruce Riedel, Director of the Intelligence Program at the institution, represented the supporters. Ms. Maloney described the agreement reached in Vienna, Austria, as a 'good agreement,' explaining that its implementation blocks Iran's access to nuclear weapons and extends the nuclear breakout time; it also includes a proper mechanism for reimposing sanctions if Iran violates the agreement. In remarks seemingly addressing some opponents of the nuclear agreement, she stated that there is no scenario in which increasing sanctions would compel Iran to completely dismantle its nuclear program. In her view, even America's allies are reluctant to escalate sanctions, and the international community sees no reason for the endless continuation of sanctions against Iran. On July 14, Iran and the six world powers of the 1+5 group, including the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, and Germany, reached a comprehensive agreement to alleviate the international community's concerns regarding Iran's nuclear program, which imposes restrictions on Iran's nuclear activities in exchange for the lifting of some sanctions imposed against Tehran. Some critics argue that the agreement does not fully halt Iran's nuclear program and does not eliminate the nuclear threat from the country, while the lifting of sanctions and the influx of money into Iran will bolster Tehran's destabilizing activities in the region. John McCain, a Republican senator from Arizona, is among these opponents who responded to Susan Maloney by saying that she can have her own judgment about the agreement, but not a single Republican voted for it, which is a good outcome. He pointed out Iran's movements and influence in some regional countries, including Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, stating that the Iranian government supports terrorism and shows no signs of changing its behavior; however, billions of dollars are set to flow into that country with the implementation of this agreement, and we are consciously giving Iran the opportunity to strengthen its forces in the region. He criticized the policies of President Barack Obama, a Democratic U.S. president, regarding the critical conditions in the Middle East and expressed doubt about the president's statement that we only have two options: agreement or war, stating that the agreement reached will not eliminate Iran's threat in the region. In the continuation of the debate, Bruce Riedel defended the agreement, saying that he agrees with Senator McCain about the critical situation in the Middle East, but it should also be considered that the implementation of this agreement can prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and worsening the situation in that volatile region. Then, Leon Wieseltier explained his opposition to the globally supported nuclear agreement with Iran, stating that the United States' problems with Iran are not solely due to its nuclear activities but are related to Tehran's behavior, warning that the implementation of this agreement will strengthen a 'hostile regime.'