Pursuing Peace Though Diplomacy

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the United States and our allies reached a landmark agreement with Iran to prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

To get to this point, Mr. Speaker, we used diplomacy to find a potential solution that seeks to stabilize the entire Middle East region. Diplomacy affords us a clearer picture of what the Iranian Government is doing and what they are capable of.

We used peaceful means to promote peace in one of the most volatile regions in the world, and I am proud of the commitment of President Obama, this administration, and our allies, in keeping these negotiations alive.

Mr. Speaker, I am not saying that our job is done. Congress must and should take a very close look at this agreement in its final form. In fact, I firmly believe that Congress has a critical role to play in the next steps of this agreement.

Let's look at what this agreement does. Within the text, Iran affirms that it will not seek, develop, or acquire a nuclear weapon; but we must ensure that the language will fully deter them from going back on their word and duly punish them if they take that path.

Within the text of the agreement, we accept that the United States will lift the sanctions that we have placed on Iran, but we must have mechanisms that will allow for oversight on the ground in Iran that holds them accountable.

This is a difficult and sensitive balance, but if this agreement has managed to strike that balance, we would miss a once-in-a-generation opportunity to transform the Middle East if we reject this deal. That is not something we can afford to flippantly dismiss.

What this teaches us, Mr. Speaker, is that aggression is not the only answer we have to handle difficult relations across the globe. In fact, aggression would not have brought us to this point where, without any loss of life for us or our allies, without significant cost to our Nation or the global economy, we have managed to find compromise.

Sanctions cannot and should not be the only way we bring nations to the table. They serve a critical purpose, and certainly, they helped in bringing us to this point.

They also come at a significant cost; rather than starving their government in the way we thought they would, they pushed the government to starve its people, resulting in vast unemployment and limited opportunity for a generation of Iranians and probably fertile ground for the radicalization of individuals.

They pushed Iran to ally itself with international actors that further hampered our efforts to stabilize this region. They pushed Iran towards total isolation, a situation in which we have no impact whatsoever. At some point, sanctions that have at points been effective become obsolete and counterproductive.

I would not ask any of my colleagues to support a deal that does not achieve our chief purpose, preventing a nuclear-armed Iran, with the ability to wreak havoc on the United States, our allies, and the world.

I will also ask my colleagues to consider the alternative if we fail to ratify a deal that would meet these goals appropriately, pushing Iran further into the shadows; giving us no chance at monitoring how, where, and when Iran is enriching uranium; and sending Iran further into the arms of bad actors or offering Iran even greater motivation to undermine basic international law.

I have one pretty solid idea of the outcome: a dangerous, complicated war that would drag what is likely the most volatile region in the world into complete chaos.

This agreement may be the best chance to put Iran at the table and keep them accountable, to engage the international community in monitoring their activities, to operate in the known and not the unknown of what they are capable of, and to give them a reason to seek the same kind of international peace that every country desperately relies upon.

Further aggression, further sanctions, further isolation can no longer be our answer, especially when we have been given a real opportunity to open the door to peace.

I urge my colleagues to give this agreement real consideration. I urge my colleagues to read this agreement. I urge my colleagues to approach this agreement without partisan or political bias.

It is time to give peace a chance.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source