Obama administration takes back seat on Iran sanctions......On Purpose?(
LAT).By Paul Richter.Reporting from Washington— Despite the Obama administration's vows to cripple Iran with economic sanctions, it is leaders in Congress and Europe who have seized the lead in the West's long-running campaign to punish Tehran for its suspected nuclear weapons program.
In recent months, the toughest moves to deter Iran from pursuing its presumed nuclear ambitions have come from a bipartisan group in Congress and European allies, especially Britain and France.
The White House at first resisted these steps before embracing them as inevitable.
The administration has imposed dozens of sanctions on Iran since 2009,
but it has carefully calibrated their effect. Officials fear that too powerful a blow to the world's third-largest oil exporter could cause an oil price increase, damaging the global economic recovery, undermining international support for the sanctions campaign and creating political trouble in an election year.
For example, top administration officials late last year were strongly resistant when Congress slapped Iran's central bank with harsh sanctions. The European Union then went further, however, imposing an embargo to halt purchases of Iranian oil by European nations over the ensuing five months.
Mark Dubowitz, an energy expert who has been advising Congress on sanctions, said
the Obama administration has tried to add sanctions "in a measured way to assure international support and to avoid anything that would spook oil and financial markets."
But as concern over Iran's nuclear progress has intensified, members of Congress, with support from the French and British governments, "have really taken the lead in being aggressive," said Dubowitz, who is executive director of a pro-sanctions group called Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
The latest sanctions clearly are having an effect. In recent weeks, the value of the Iranian currency has plummeted and prices for food and other consumer goods have soared, causing hardship for ordinary Iranians and putting political pressure on the regime.
A major crisis with Iran carries political risks for the White House.
A war or other disruptive event that causes a sharp rise in oil prices could endanger the United States' fragile economic recovery and probably President Obama's chances for reelection.
When Congress began devising central bank sanctions last fall, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner met key lawmakers and made an emotional plea for them to change course. The Senate voted 100 to 0 to press ahead.
"The Obama administration was, in fact, inclined to continue a kind of incremental ratcheting of sanctions, but thanks to one of the most universal votes we've seen in a divided Capitol Hill in several years, the administration was really forced to move forward with the decision to sanction the central bank," said Suzanne Maloney, an Iran specialist at the Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy.
When Obama signed the legislation in December, he added language in a signing statement suggesting that the administration might delay implementation. Yet the administration has more recently publicly embraced the sanctions as a viable tool.
When the Senate Banking Committee began preparing legislation on SWIFT,
a Treasury Departmentofficial met with aides to ask that it be watered down. After the committee adopted the original language, the administration then changed course and voiced support for the measure.
Some lawmakers also say the administration is not tough enough in enforcing sanctions.
This week, it issued guidelines on how it will determine whether countries have sufficiently cut purchases of Iranian oil, as required under U.S. sanctions passed last year, in favor of other oil suppliers.
Sens. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) argued that the administration should set a specific goal.
But the administration rejected that notion, preferring more latitude to decide whether to punish Iranian customers who are also key American allies, such as Japan and South Korea........Hellooooooooooooo how about TURKEY?
Crunch time will come in June when the administration must decide whether to punish nations that haven't complied. U.S. officials could still waive the rules if they determine sanctioning those nations would create unacceptable damage to the world economy.
But going easy in a campaign year may subject Obama to political attacks that he is weak on Iran and indifferent on Israel."
It's going to be a moment of truth," said Dubowitz of the pro-sanctions advocacy group.
Hmmmmm.......First Obama's 'trusted' buddy Erdogan not only refuses to implement oil sanctions on Iran, he actually increases imports of Iranian oil.
Second Obama refuses to impose oil sanctions for another six months while Europe does it right away,
in my view this is deliberate so that European oil will cost them more thus affecting their already weak economy.
Third he puts his own reelection before the safety of 7,6 Million Israelis.Makes you wonder on who's side this President really is?Read the full story
here.
