Republicans in the U.S. Senate and the JCPOA

According to the New York Times, some Republicans in the Senate have expressed their dissatisfaction with Donald Trump's inclination to withdraw from the nuclear deal with Iran, and even some of the President's security advisors support maintaining the agreement. The newspaper adds that under one of the options, the Trump administration may announce that Iran has violated the agreement, but the U.S. will attempt to preserve it for now and will not immediately pursue a policy of sanctions. In this case, Congress will have 60 days to consider reinstating sanctions against Iran. However, it seems that despite the majority of Republicans opposing the signing of this agreement in 2015, they currently show little interest in reviewing the deal or the possibility of sanctioning Iran. Senator Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who led the unified Republican opposition to the nuclear deal in 2015, recently warned Trump that he can only withdraw from this agreement once, and doing so would lead to a self-imposed crisis. The New York Times adds that in contact with about 20 Republican senators, all of whom had previously opposed the agreement, none were willing to take a position on the issue at this time, indicating that the majority of opponents of the nuclear deal prefer to remain silent. The New York Times also reports that a spokesperson for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a staunch opponent of the nuclear agreement with Iran, declined to answer questions regarding the organization's desire to withdraw from the deal. Mark Dubowitz, head of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, another organization advocating for the cancellation of the nuclear deal with Iran, stated that he does not support a hasty withdrawal from the agreement. According to the newspaper, Democratic Senator Richard J. Durbin, a key supporter of the agreement in 2015, recently compared the controversy over withdrawing from the nuclear deal with Iran to the issue of healthcare, stating: 'It’s another one of those sharp slogans that will fall apart when it reaches the Senate floor.' Nevertheless, some staunch opponents of the agreement still call for its cancellation. Republican Senator Tom Cotton recently stated: 'I don’t think we gain much from this agreement. Therefore, its cancellation does not worry me at all.' The British newspaper The Guardian also writes about the JCPOA, stating that according to former U.S. government officials and experts, U.S. security agencies are under pressure from the White House to justify Iran's violation of the 2015 nuclear agreement by providing evidence. This situation recalls the politicization of security information that led to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. The Guardian adds that the failure of the nuclear agreement between Iran, the U.S., and five other global powers, especially while the U.S. is in severe confrontation with the North Korean regime, will create another crisis regarding the development of nuclear programs. It is reported that experts from U.S. security agencies, considering the experience of the Iraq War in 2003, which was initiated by the George W. Bush administration based on false evidence of weapons of mass destruction, are resisting White House pressures to provide evidence supporting Iran's violation of the nuclear agreement. According to The Guardian, Ned Price, a former CIA expert who was the spokesperson for the National Security Council during Barack Obama's presidency, stated: 'I have heard from personnel in intelligence and security agencies that they feel under pressure. They told me they feel this situation has happened before and reminds them of similar pressures in the past.' The Guardian adds that David Cohen, a former deputy director of the CIA, said that the Trump administration's decision on this matter, even before the evidence and security information confirm it, is concerning. In an interview with CNN, he said: 'If it appears that the President intends to politicize intelligence and security matters, the integrity of all our security agencies and operations will be called into question.'