WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s defense of the complex and painstakingly negotiated nuclear deal that his administration had reached with Iran boiled down to a simple, if controversial, contention: The only real alternative to the deal was war.
Obama returned to that conclusion repeatedly at a Wednesday press conference that stretched for more than one hour.
“Without a deal,” he said in his opening statement, “we risk even more war in the Middle East.”
A few minutes later, in response to a reporter’s question, Obama dismissed concerns that majorities in the House and Senate might vote down the deal, forcing him to use his presidential veto. Wouldn’t a rejection of the deal by lawmakers make him question its wisdom?
“Either the issue of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is resolved diplomatically through a negotiation or it’s resolved through force, through war,” Obama countered. “Those are — those are the options.”
What about those who argued that Obama should have employed more diplomatic, economic or military leverage to get a “better deal” from the intransigent Iranians?
“What does that mean?” Obama asked rhetorically. “If the alternative is that we should bring Iran to heel through military force, then those critics should say so. And that will be an honest debate.”
The president’s performance in the White House’s East Room came just one day after his negotiators concluded contentious, marathon talks with Iran. The deal they reached to limit Iran’s nuclear enrichment program — more than six years in the making — was swiftly condemned by virtually every major Republican presidential candidate.
House Speaker John Boehner’s spokesman said on Wednesday that Obama, in defending the deal, had shown himself to be “hopelessly disconnected from reality.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, addressing his country’s parliament a few hours before Obama spoke, left open the possibility of future military action against Iran.
“We will reserve our right to defend ourselves against all of our enemies,” Netanyahu said. “We have strength, and it is great and mighty.”
The president responded with a defense of the nuclear agreement that was equal parts pugilistic and legalistic. Obama was briefed on the progress of the negotiations with Iran as often as twice a day and had amassed a detailed knowledge of the 109-page agreement and the additional 47 pages of annexes. He drew on that knowledge, the way an experienced courtroom lawyer might rely on case law expertise, to answer criticisms that the deal didn’t last long enough, that it wouldn’t prevent the Iranians from covertly producing a nuclear weapon, that it still allowed the Iranians some nuclear enrichment capacity and therefore didn’t go far enough. He seemed eager to address every question.
“Have we exhausted (all the) Iran questions here?” Obama asked at one point. “I am really enjoying this Iran debate. … Go ahead. Go ahead.”
A few minutes later, Obama picked up a piece of paper from the lectern in front of him, eager to keep talking about the deal. “OK,” he said. “I made some notes about many of the arguments — the other arguments that I’ve heard here.”
Obama’s defense of the deal wasn’t designed to win over stubborn critics. His audience was the American public, worried about the threat posed by a nuclear-armed Iran but also exhausted by more than 14 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama has speculated in recent weeks that the nuclear deal could empower moderates in Iran who are eager for better relations with the rest of the world.
Such hopeful talk was largely absent from Obama’s Wednesday press conference, which focused on the dangers posed by Iran and the need to prevent it from ever acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Republicans have blasted the deal for allowing Iran as many as 24 days before it grants inspectors access to military sites that could house covert programs. The delay could give Iran enough time to conceal illegal activity, critics said. Obama dismissed the charges as unrealistic and not grounded in science.
“This is not something you hide in a closet,” Obama said of the centrifuges and other sensitive equipment needed to make weapons-grade uranium.
