National Flag of the United States of America
Washington, United States:
US House and Senate members reacted coolly Monday to an extension of international negotiations over Iran's nuclear program, with skeptical lawmakers demanding Congress "tighten the economic vice on Tehran" through new sanctions.
No sooner had the extension been announced in Vienna and US Secretary of State John Kerry implored US lawmakers not to "walk away" from the negotiations by slapping punitive sanctions on Iran, that several lawmakers advocated just that, setting up a potential White House-Congress clash next year.
"Now more than ever, it's critical that Congress enacts sanctions that give Iran's mullahs no choice but to dismantle their illicit nuclear program," Republican Senator Mark Kirk, a fierce proponent of new sanctions, said in a statement.
"Congress will not give Iran more time to build a nuclear bomb."
Kirk and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Robert Menendez, a Democrat, have drawn up tough legislation.
But the chamber's Democratic leadership has refused to bring it to the floor, allowing a chance for President Barack Obama's administration to pursue its negotiations.
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, reacting to the delay, said Obama should allow new sanctions to serve as increased leverage on the Islamic republic.
"This seven-month extension should be used to tighten the economic vice on Tehran -- already suffering from falling energy prices -- to force the concessions that Iran has been resisting," Royce said in a statement.
"Unfortunately, time is on Tehran's side as it continues its research and development of centrifuges."
Royce was backed up by a Democrat on the panel, Brad Sherman.
"Modest sanctions have produced modest results," Sherman said on Twitter. "New strong immediate sanctions are best hope for a good agreement."
House Republican Peter Roskam went further.
"Extending these ill-conceived negotiations for another six months will only buy the mullahs more time to develop a nuclear weapons capability," Roskam said.
"It's time we stop this nonsensical process and reinstate the crippling economic sanctions that brought the radical Iranian regime to the negotiating table in the first place."
Senator Bob Corker, tipped to replace Menendez as the powerful Foreign Relations chairman when Republicans take full control of Congress in January, offered a more diplomatic route: a threat of new sanctions should the Iran deal ultimately fall apart.
"I would rather the administration continue to negotiate than agree to a bad deal that would only create more instability in the region and around the world," said Corker.
But he added: "Congress must have the opportunity to weigh in before implementation of any final agreement and begin preparing alternatives, including tougher sanctions, should negotiations fail."
The State Department acknowledged the role of sanctions in bringing Tehran to the negotiations.
"On the other hand, sanctions are not alone going to get us the comprehensive deal," State Department spokesman Jeffrey Rathke told reporters.
No sooner had the extension been announced in Vienna and US Secretary of State John Kerry implored US lawmakers not to "walk away" from the negotiations by slapping punitive sanctions on Iran, that several lawmakers advocated just that, setting up a potential White House-Congress clash next year.
"Now more than ever, it's critical that Congress enacts sanctions that give Iran's mullahs no choice but to dismantle their illicit nuclear program," Republican Senator Mark Kirk, a fierce proponent of new sanctions, said in a statement.
"Congress will not give Iran more time to build a nuclear bomb."
Kirk and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Robert Menendez, a Democrat, have drawn up tough legislation.
But the chamber's Democratic leadership has refused to bring it to the floor, allowing a chance for President Barack Obama's administration to pursue its negotiations.
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, reacting to the delay, said Obama should allow new sanctions to serve as increased leverage on the Islamic republic.
"This seven-month extension should be used to tighten the economic vice on Tehran -- already suffering from falling energy prices -- to force the concessions that Iran has been resisting," Royce said in a statement.
"Unfortunately, time is on Tehran's side as it continues its research and development of centrifuges."
Royce was backed up by a Democrat on the panel, Brad Sherman.
"Modest sanctions have produced modest results," Sherman said on Twitter. "New strong immediate sanctions are best hope for a good agreement."
House Republican Peter Roskam went further.
"Extending these ill-conceived negotiations for another six months will only buy the mullahs more time to develop a nuclear weapons capability," Roskam said.
"It's time we stop this nonsensical process and reinstate the crippling economic sanctions that brought the radical Iranian regime to the negotiating table in the first place."
Senator Bob Corker, tipped to replace Menendez as the powerful Foreign Relations chairman when Republicans take full control of Congress in January, offered a more diplomatic route: a threat of new sanctions should the Iran deal ultimately fall apart.
"I would rather the administration continue to negotiate than agree to a bad deal that would only create more instability in the region and around the world," said Corker.
But he added: "Congress must have the opportunity to weigh in before implementation of any final agreement and begin preparing alternatives, including tougher sanctions, should negotiations fail."
The State Department acknowledged the role of sanctions in bringing Tehran to the negotiations.
"On the other hand, sanctions are not alone going to get us the comprehensive deal," State Department spokesman Jeffrey Rathke told reporters.
Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world
