Hawks who are hoping to push through a new round of Iran sanctions to kill diplomacy are struggling mightily to get the proposal scheduled for a vote, with a growing sense they don’t have enough influence to get it up quickly.
Sen. Bob Corker (R – TN) is championing what seems to be the most likely compromise, scheduling the vote for July 21, the day after the six month interim Iran deal expires.
Corker argues this would be a “better solution” than voting, since it would put pressure on Iran to make a final deal before the end of the interim pact. This has been the argument of some supporters of the bill.
On the other hand, several hawks are supporting the bill specifically to violate the interim pact and end diplomacy. They aren’t too happy with delaying until after that pact, and are arguing July 21 wouldn’t be workable. Sen. Carl Levin (D – MI) was particularly critical of the plan, saying it would undermine the prospect of ever imposing the sanctions at all.
Looks to me like, AIPAC needs to more time to raise more cash.
I don't think Sen. Carl Levin is disappointed in the delay. Based on his public statements, it seems he opposes the new sanctions bill on the grounds that it might undermine diplomatic negotiations.
"There's a lot of things in that bill that wouldn't make sense on July 21st," Levin said. But he's not arguing that the bill should be brought up sooner. His position seems to be that it is a bad bill altogether because it goes too far in setting the conditionss for a final nuclear deal.
I think Levin, though usually quite hawkish, is in the camp of those who want to wait for diplomacy to run it's course before considering a vote on new sanctions
Sen. Carl Levin (D – Israel) was particularly critical of the plan, saying it would undermine the prospect of ever going to war for Israel at all.