The Indianapolis Star: Todd Young: Iran Deal is Bad for U.S.

Op-Ed

By Rep. Todd Young

As a former Marine Intelligence Officer, I know the threats our country faces. Among those threats is Iran, one of the leading sponsors of global terrorism. In the coming days, I plan to vote against President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran.

From my service in the Marine Corps, I know how difficult it is to uncover covert activity. Given Tehran's refusal to fully account for its illicit nuclear program, I expect the Iranian regime will be capable of exploiting weaknesses within the final deal to continue advancing toward a nuclear weapon at clandestine locations.

Even if they don't cheat, under the agreement Iran maintains a legal path to a nuclear weapon and regains long-denied access to missiles capable of carrying a nuclear payload.

I oppose the final agreement, because for years, Iran remaining a nuclear-threshold state was a non-starter. We understood well the destabilizing effect this would have within the region and beyond.

A deal of this import is not a partisan issue. Despite recent rhetoric, this debate cannot be reduced to "this deal or war." Making an informed decision to oppose the agreement required me to complete a number of foundational steps.

I've traveled to the Middle East to meet with allies in the past, solicited experts' input, read the entire 159-page agreement, and demanded the Obama administration make available the full text of secret IAEA side agreements not disclosed to the American people.

President Obama promised Hoosiers transparency. He said we would have opportunity to look at "details of every aspect of a final deal" and, if unsatisfactory, declared "no deal is better than a bad deal."

Implied was the understanding that a bad nuclear deal with Iran is more dangerous than no deal at all.

Others have catalogued Iran's well-documented financial and military support for terror groups that murder innocent men, women, and children. The president considers this a separate issue, arguing we have no viable means to curb Iran's bad behavior.

I disagree. One lesson learned throughout my military service is that leadership ultimately comes down to respect. It isn't about being everybody's friend. More recently, the message I received from our allies and partners was clear: the world trusts the United States will lead because we've demonstrated the experience and wherewithal to keep bad actors in check.

The president's deal heavily relies on the hope that, over time, concessions and goodwill bestowed upon Iran will be justified by a more cooperative Islamic Republic. It prematurely rewards the regime with billions of dollars in sanctions relief for behavior not exhibited in over three decades of deceptive diplomacy.

As a result of the president's aggressive public relations campaign to win support for his deal, the head count in the Senate tipped a veto-proof minority (only 34 senators are needed to ensure a presidential veto cannot be overridden).

Should the president ignore the majority in Congress and use his veto pen to override a resolution of disapproval, it is important we have a pragmatic response.

That's why I'm taking an early lead on an effort I've likened to a "scarlet letter" proposal. I want to ensure Americans are duly informed when they interact, whether through investments or business interactions, with entities that have assets tied to Iran.

I'm working to make it so every American is notified if their investment could wind up in the hands of the largest state-sponsor of global terror.

A significant number of states are looking at methods to enhance state regulations that prohibit investment of state taxpayer funds in assets tied to Tehran. Such efforts are to be applauded and I'm pleased Indiana is taking a lead here.

This nuclear issue isn't about any one person, or an individual legacy. It's about eliminating a persistent threat to our homeland.

Over time, it is the sum of your actions that dictate the level of respect one commands. Our nation suffers from a deficit of leaders who can form strong coalitions, build consensus, and gain trust from the American people. I believe I owe it to the people I represent to take an honest stand and demand a deal that steers the American people toward a better position, not worse; creates less chaos, not more; and leaves us safer, not less secure.

Source