What's Up Chuck? Why Does Senator Schumer Oppose the Iran Nuclear Deal?

HOT TOPICS ▶ Target: Iran     The Real Baltimore     Reality Asserts Itself     United Kingdom    

  August 11, 2015

What's Up Chuck? Why Does Senator Schumer Oppose the Iran Nuclear Deal?

Author and analyst Phyllis Bennis discusses president Obama's Iranian nuclear deal and the opposition to that deal
Members don't see ads. If you are a member, and you're seeing this appeal, click here

Share to Facebook Share to Twitter

Real News simply has no entertainment value. But its news value puts CNN,MSNBC,ABC& BBC to shame! - Santhip
Log in and tell us why you support TRNN


Phyllis Bennis is a Fellow and the Director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington D.C. She is the author of Understanding the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Primer, Before and After: US Foreign Policy and the September 11 Crisis, Ending the US War in Afghanistan: A Primer and Understanding the US-Iran Crisis: A Primer. Her most recent book is Understanding ISIS and the New Global War on Terror: A Primer.


JARED BALL, PRODUCER, TRNN: Welcome back to the Real News Network. I'm Jared Ball here in Baltimore.

Last week, President Obama delivered his Iran nuclear deal speech at American University. Obama took the moment to further connect his legacy to that of John F. Kennedy, whose 1963 speech at that same university was said by Obama to be also about finding peaceful solutions to what he said are the threats we face today. He spoke mostly about his Iranian nuclear deal, which continues to reverberate globally, with sides being drawn in favor and against, including now one prominent detractor from the Democratic party, Senator Chuck Schumer.

To discuss the speech further is again Phyllis Bennis, who directs the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, DC, and who is author of many books, including recently Understanding ISIS and the New Global War on Terror: A Primer. Welcome back to the Real News, Phyllis Bennis.


BALL: Before we go too far I'd like to ask your thoughts on Obama's admission in that speech he gave last week that this country, as he said, is an empire, one that is both exceptional in its military might but also its capacity to bring peace to the world, hence, his allusion to Kennedy. What do you make of this comment and the speech itself, including what this comment may mean in terms of this Iranian deal, or America's, or this country's approach to Iran and the rest of the world?

BENNIS: I think the speech was very important. As has happened before, President Obama really spoke the words of someone very committed to the victory of diplomacy over war, which this Iran deal really represents, even though so much of his foreign policy has been based on relying on military force anyway, despite recognizing that it's not going to work. So there's a very fundamental, deep frustration, I think, in the context of what the policies actually are.

But on the question of defending the deal with Iran, this was very important. The pushback on that deal that President Obama is facing right now, most recently from the defection of powerful Senator Chuck Schumer, known in some places as the senator from Wall Street, the senator from AIPAC, the senator from a variety of other places. Rarely the senator from New York, because he certainly doesn't represent what the people of New York want.

But he's facing very intense pressure. And in that context I think his very strong effort to both evoke the legitimacy of JFK and use very harsh language towards his opponent, particularly when he compared the Republican opponents to the hardliners in Iran, recognizing absolutely accurately that both are on the same side, the side of preventing this agreement from going through, and thus ultimately supporting war. That raised outrage from Republicans and other opponents of the deal, precisely because he said what is so embarrassingly true: that anyone who is against this deal would prefer war.

Because those are really the options. This claim about, we want a better deal. We want a deal. We're not saying no deal. But we want a better deal. You should go back and renegotiate. That's a done deal. The negotiations are over. Everybody went home. There's nobody left in Vienna. There aren't going to be any more negotiations. So the real world is to understand it's either this resolution, this agreement, this deal, or not a deal. And if it's not a deal the threat of war becomes very, very powerful.

So I think Obama's speech in that context, using very tough language, was very appropriate.

BALL: So Schumer has said himself and others have said about him that his name also means shomer in Hebrew, or the guardian of Israel. Is he playing this role of rejecting the deal Obama struck with Iran, or wanting to reject the deal Obama struck with Iran, is he playing the role of protector of Israel? And what constituency is he representing in this rejection of the deal, and who benefits from the position that he's taking?

BENNIS: Well, it's a slightly different question of what constituency he is representing [inaud.] he doesn't seem to be representing the constituents of New York, like most Americans, support the deal at a rate of about 60 percent. American Jews support the deal at about 61 percent. So he doesn't seem to be [representing] American Jews.

[Inaud.] most politicians representing the [interest] include many pro-Israel funders, who are demanding opposition to the deal. The question of who benefits is a little bit different. Those who benefit from the threat of war are military contractors. The CEOs of military producers. Places like, whether it's McDonnell Douglas or Boeing, General Dynamics, all these companies that produce the war planes and the bombs and the bullets and the guns, and all the things that keep wars going, they benefit. The notion that no one benefits from war is simply not true.

Now, I don't know the full details of Senator Schumer's donations. I don't know how much he gets from the political action committees representing the arms industry, for instance. It would be a good thing to check. But I think that there's no question that among his funders and supporters are those that see the Israeli position of opposing the deal as a legitimate position may argue that the agreement is bad because it would in their view, I think falsely, represent a threat to Israel.

So that is part of who he's representing, is those people who are concerned with the Netanyahu understanding of what is in Israel's best interest, which in this case is the interest of playing the spoiler. As President Obama put it, how can it possibly make Israel stronger? These weren't his exact words. But to paraphrase, he said how can it possibly help Israel for the world to see it as a spoiler for this deal?

BALL: Phyllis Bennis, thank you very much for joining us here at the Real News and helping us put some context and interpretation to this speech.

BENNIS: Thank you, Jared. It's been a pleasure.

BALL: And thank you for joining us at the Real News. And for all involved, again, I'm Jared Ball here in Baltimore. And as always, as Fred Hampton used to say, to you we say peace if you're willing to fight for it. So peace, everybody. We'll catch you in the whirlwind.


DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.


Our automatic spam filter blocks comments with multiple links and multiple users using the same IP address. Please make thoughtful comments with minimal links using only one user name. If you think your comment has been mistakenly removed please email us at contact@therealnews.com

latest stories

Undoing the New Deal: African-Americans, Racism and the FDR/Johnson Reforms (Pt5)
British Media Against Corbyn (pt 2/2)
Only Two Weeks Left To Help Us Reach Our Goal
Disney Buys Fox, Will Viewers Pay the Price?
Can 'Unity' Fix the DNC?
Eddie Conway on Why We Need Real News
How Right-Wing Sinclair Plans to Take Over Local TV
Real Media: Why We Need to Rethink Transport
Police Reform: How to Make 150K and Rob the People who Pay You
Fight Within UK Labour Party Pits Career Politicians Against Radicals Pt. 1/2
Poor People's Campaign Revival: A Season of Organizing
Baltimore Students Offer Solutions to Stop Police Brutality
From Net Neutrality to Tax Cuts, Trump's Billionaires are Having a Field Day
The Fight for Net Neutrality Isn't Over
Will Kirwan Consider Race When Recommending Fixes to Maryland Schools?
US Strikes Out with New War-Mongering on Iran
Baltimore Beat & TRNN: What's Next? (4/4)
TRNN Exclusive: On 9th Anniversary of the Iraqi Journalist that Shoed Bush
Democracy in Crisis: Law & Order Dumb-Dumb
Putin 'Quite Muted' in Response to Russian Olympic Doping Scandal
World Bank and World's Third Largest Insurer Divest from Most Oil and Gas
Ecuador's Vice-President Sentenced to Six Years Prison for Corruption
Children's Health Insurance Program to Expire Under GOP Tax Bill
Undoing the New Deal: Truman Embraces the Cold War (pt4)
Putin's Syria 'Victory' Won't End the Proxy War
Palestinians Stand Up to Israel, Will the World?
Baltimore Beat & TRNN: Is Having a White CEO in a Majority Black City a Problem? (3/4)
Can Baby Bonds Help Close Baltimore's Wealth Gap?
Digital Dystopia: FCC Ends Net Neutrality
Judge in J20 Case Drops Inciting Riot Charge But Condemns Journalism as Conspiracy

TheRealNewsNetwork.com, RealNewsNetwork.com, The Real News Network, Real News Network, The Real News, Real News, Real News For Real People, IWT are trademarks and service marks of Independent World Television inc. "The Real News" is the flagship show of IWT and The Real News Network.

All original content on this site is copyright of The Real News Network. Click here for more

Problems with this site? Please let us know

Web Design, Web Development and Managed Hosting