Iran Nuke Deal Likely to Lead to Greater Cooperation Between Tehran and Pyongyang on Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Weapons, Says Ros-Lehtinen

Statement

U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Chairman of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa, made the following statement at a joint subcommittee hearing entitled, "The Iran-North Korea Strategic Alliance." The hearing was held jointly by the Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, Asia and Pacific and Middle East and North Africa subcommittees. Statement by Ros-Lehtinen:

"I want to thank Judge Poe and Chairman Salmon for bringing our three subcommittees together to focus on the nexus between these two rogue regimes: Iran and North Korea.

As Congress continues to do our due diligence on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action between the P5+1 and Iran that the Obama administration submitted to us last week, it's important that we do not make the same mistakes again. In 2008, I was outspoken against the George W. Bush administration for removing North Korea from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list as a concession to Pyongyang during negotiations over its nuclear program, and I am outspoken against the Obama administration's concessions to Tehran during the negotiations, and ultimately, this deal. Yet, as far back as the Clinton administration, each administration continues to make the same mistakes of offering these rogue nations concessions while allowing them to maintain their nuclear infrastructure and misguidedly falling back on hope that this time will be different -- this time, things will change.

These negotiations mirror the same track the nuclear negotiations with North Korea took. Iran has been following the North Korean playbook on exactly how to extract concessions from the U.S. and the international community, while simultaneously continuing to improve its nuclear program, expand its infrastructure and support its illicit activities. But it isn't just that the Iranian regime is following the North Korean playbook, successfully I might add, it's that the Obama administration is following the same failed playbook that the Clinton and Bush administrations pursued. It is alarming and striking just how similar the language is between President Clinton's 1994 announcement of a nuclear agreement with North Korea and President Obama's announcement of a nuclear agreement with Iran earlier this month.

Last week, Alan Dershowitz wrote about the similarities - and even posted a chart that represented the similarities in language -- the words used - between the Clinton and Obama statements. In 1994, President Clinton said the North Korea agreement will make the U.S., the Korean Peninsula and the world safer; he assured us that the deal didn't rely on trust -- that compliance would be certified by the IAEA. President Clinton also made the dubious claim that, because of our willingness to engage North Korea on its nuclear profile alone would be a crucial step toward drawing Pyongyang into the global community and predicted the end of the rogue regime's isolation.

Does any of this sound familiar to us -- it should, because these are the very same arguments President Obama used when announcing the Iran deal. When the North Korea deal was reached, one of the most significant flaws was that it failed to dismantle any of Pyongyang's nuclear infrastructure. The deal was designed merely to delay the North Korean bomb, not prevent it -- and we even promised, as we are doing in the JCPOA, to modernize and improve North Korea's nuclear infrastructure. And now we're aiming to prevent the Iranian bomb.

The totality of this deal hinges on a bet by the administration and the rest of the P5+1 that the Iranian regime will see the error of its ways and wants to be part of the global community and will forsake its support for terror and other illicit behavior. That is a heck of a gamble to make when all of -- not even just the preponderance, but all of -- the evidence indicates that this is not the likely outcome, but rather that Iran will use this as a means to increase its belligerence.

And now, with this deal, we are likely to see an increase in Iran and North Korean activity on ballistic missiles and covert nuclear activities, because not only will we be lifting the sanctions on Iranian scientists and on Iran's nuclear program, but we will be lifting the sanctions on its ballistic missile program and its military leaders. And that is where Iran and North Korea are likely to resume their cooperation -- on the weaponization and the ballistic missiles.

That is a dangerous gamble for us to make with U.S. national security, and it is not a gamble I or any of us should be willing to take. And that is why we must reject this deal, demand a better deal or else re-impose the sanctions and use the only action Iran understands -- strength -- to force it to abandon its nuclear ambitions."

Source