When Congress returns to Washington following the July 4th recess, it will most likely take up a resolution introduced by Democrat Gary Ackerman, Resolution 362.  Advertised as a “economic sanctions” bill, it expresses the “sense” of Congress “demanding” that the President do the following:

…initiate an international effort to immediately and dramatically increase the economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on Iran to verifiably suspend its nuclear enrichment activities by, inter alia, prohibiting the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products; imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran...

As Francis Boyle, Professor of International Law at the University of Illinois, writes, "I do not see how this could be done without a blockade given its comprehensive and unequivocal language." Yet this resolution already has over 220 cosponsors, including more than 100 Democrats.

This is not the bipartisan action the people of the United States want from Congress.  93% of the US public oppose military action against Iran. So what’s happening here?

AIPAC is always so modest about its influence, except of course to its own members. Say that it is the most influential organization regarding US-Israel relations (like it says on its own website) and your likely to be called all sorts of things. The fact of the matter is that AIPAC has made passage of this resolution a legislative priority. They seem to be doing very well. A staffer at Pelosi’s office said that it is likely to pass “like a knife through butter”.  The House leadership even put it on fast-track, and will likely pass it with almost no debate (on suspension), the same way they pass other “non-controversial” resolutions encouraging the fight against cancer or celebrating Little League teams. 

Most of us recognize this resolution represents a clear and present danger for all of us, not only people in the Middle East, but for all the people in the world, for it could set up a series of events that spins out of control, including the use of nuclear weapons on targets in Iran.

I think the immediate goal of the resolution creators is not to get President Bush to take additional action, as he already is doing all he can to promote war with Iran, including openly rejecting the conclusions of the National Intelligence Estimate, and pushing hard for the most punitive sanctions against Iran. No, the goal  is most likely to push Iran to act.

In a candid conversation with AIPAC supporters in January 2007, John Bolton, former US ambassador to the UN, said that he hoped that Iran would respond to sanctions then in place by “doing something dramatic”. Not, as he might say publicly, by disavowing its nuclear program completely, but more like “withdrawing from the nonproliferation treaty, or throwing out inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which I actually hoped they would do – that that kind of reaction would produce a counter-reaction that actually would be more beneficial to us.” In other words, for some in the administration the desire has always been to goad Iran into doing something that will create a pretext for war.

This strategy may be working. Ali Larijani, the speaker of Iran's parliament and a former nuclear negotiator, said there was "only a little time left" for talks before Iran would make unspecified moves that the West would regret.  The LA Times reports:

Larijani, who is close to supreme leader Ali Khamenei, did not specify what Iran would do. But Tehran's options include kicking out International Atomic Energy Agency monitors now keeping an eye on Iran's nuclear program or stepping up its uranium enrichment program to produce weapons-grade material. 

That is why this resolution is so dangerous. Not only because it is just the opposite of what is needed, namely direct and intense negotiations, negotiations that should include a commitment for a nuclear-weapons-free Middle East (including Israel, which currently has a large stockpile of nuclear weapons) and worldwide nuclear disarmament. But also because this resolution leads us down a slippery slope to catastrophe. The little proviso in the resolution saying that “nothing in this resolution shall be construed as an authorization of the use of force against Iran” does not hide the clear intent of its backers. Namely that real negotiations are "off the table" and military action is on the table, backed by a bipartisan majority in Congress.

This week we must take action. Contact your congresspeople, especially if they are on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Visit stopAIPAC.org and learn more. Together we can make a future that is livable, and reject a future of endless war.

There
will be a public protest of this resolution outside the San Francisco Federal Building (where Nancy Pelosi has her home
office) July 8th starting at 3pm.