Business Standard

'Opposed to any new sanctions on Iran while talks are ongoing'

Image

Press Trust of India Washington
The White House has expressed its strong opposition to any Congressional move that imposes new sanctions on Iran while the talks are ongoing on the latter's nuclear weapons policy.

"The US President Barack Obama has said if the Iranians make it clear that they will not agree with the international community to come into compliance with international expectations of their nuclear program, then the President will be the first person to go to Congress," the White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters.

"I think that we are optimistic about our success in getting Congress to move quickly to put in place additional sanctions on Iran," he said.
 

"Then we can go to our partners, who have been so critical to success of this strategy, to implement this sanctions regime in a coordinated, comprehensive way that will only apply additional pressure on Iran," he added.

"We can do all of that if it's necessary and if the talks break down. Right now there are ongoing negotiations, and it's not necessary right now to put in place additional sanctions," he said in response to a question on the Republican controlled Congressional move to impose new sanctions on Iran.

"The US President has threatened to veto any such legislation. Throughout the negotiations, the administration has kept members of Congress in the loop on the status of those negotiations," he said.

"We welcome their input and their contribution to this broader effort. But as it relates to the Corker-Graham legislation, this is legislation that the President would veto, simply because it would negatively impact our ability to reach a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear program and to implement a future deal, he added.

"The Corker-Graham legislation would set a harmful precedent. This administration is committed to being in close touch with the Congress, whatever the outcome," Earnest said.

"But a congressional vote on a non-binding instrument is not required by law and could set an unhelpful precedent for other negotiations that result in other non-binding instruments," he added.

Don't miss the most important news and views of the day. Get them on our Telegram channel

First Published: Jan 30 2015 | 9:40 AM IST

Explore News