WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, joined Pod Save the World this week to discuss the assassination of a Iranian nuclear scientist and the future of the Iran nuclear deal in the post-Trump era, the Trump administration’s rushed arms sale to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and his progressive foreign policy goals for the new Congress and incoming Biden-Harris administration.

On the assassination of foreign leaders and long-term stability in the Middle East, Murphy said: “There's a good reason why we don't assassinate foreign leaders. Because when we engage in that kind of behavior, it ultimately lends an authority to that kind of action that can ultimately boomerang on the United States. There’s a reason why we pressed the Israelis to forego these kind of actions during the eight years of the Obama administration.

“And if this is really about trying to tie the hands of the Biden administration with respect to re-entering the nuclear agreement, it's absolutely disastrous because there is no path to a safer Middle East without our ability to restart at least some elements of that agreement. And so we don't have all the full details, we have not been briefed inside Congress about this, but if the United States had something to do with this, it is going to accrue to the detriment of America's security – both in the short run and in the long run.”

On the future of the Iran nuclear deal in the post-Trump era, Murphy said: “I don't think the dividing lines on this issue have fundamentally changed over the last four years. I don't think that there are Democrats that supported the JCPOA that now would draw a new line. I also don't think there are a lot of converts to our side. I don't think there are likely many Republicans that have changed their mind. They want all of these issues to be litigated. 

“The problem for Republicans is that they have now had four years to test their theory of the case, right? Donald Trump came in, obliterated the JCPOA, and articulated the Republican case, which is that we should ramp up sanctions, sort of blow past the levels that were in place prior to the JCPOA as a means of getting the Iranians to come to the table on everything. And Mike Pompeo wrote down what everything was. He had these 12 demands of the Iranians. He had four years to effectuate this policy. And he didn't just fail, Pompeo failed miserably. Not only did he not get the Iranians to the table on any of his 12 demands, the Iranians got closer to a nuclear weapon. They're now two months away rather than 12 months away, they started shooting American troops inside Iraq – something they weren't doing when Donald Trump took over.” 

Murphy added: “And so while Republicans are going to object to getting back into the deal, they really don't have a leg to stand on because we've tried their way and it didn't work. So I think the support exists certainly within Democratic party for Biden to re-enter the agreement. But remember, there are two sides here. And the Iranians are also going to ask for more. The Iranians are going to say ‘well, we want reparations for all the damage done to our economy once you've walked away.’ And we shouldn't be willing to agree to that, but we should also just understand that it's not just the United States that's going to be driving a hard bargain if we're back at the table with the Iranians–they're going to be driving a hard bargain as well.”

 

On the Trump administration's rushed arms sale to the UAE and dangerous arms race it is fueling across the Middle East, Murphy said: “First, we all have to assume that there was some invisible ink on the Abraham Accords and that when you reveal it you find Reaper drones. And so I do think there will be a question as to whether the UAE feels like it has to make good on its commitments if the United States doesn't ultimately deliver all of the weapons in the sale. And by the way, this is a dizzying array of lethal arms that we have never, ever been willing to send into the Middle East.

“Why on earth does the Middle East need Reaper drones, nevermind F-35s, especially when the recipient of these drones has been regularly participating in the killing of civilians, either by accident or on purpose inside of Yemen? So I think the briefing that we got last night, I hope was equally disturbing for Republicans and Democrats. It was crystal clear that the administration is rushing this sale through and has not dotted I’s and crossed T's, that the Emiratis have all sorts of commitments they would need to make that they have not yet made in order to receive these weapons. 

Murphy continued: “And so without getting into the details of how this sale is structured, it is likely that even if Congress couldn't overturn this sale before the end of the year, there would be an awful lot still to do under a Biden administration and that the Biden administration may have some ability to hold back some of these weapons or place new conditions on them. It's just impossible to get this large of a sale actually done and completed before January 20. And my hope is that whether or not this gets sort of officially noticed before Biden takes office, he'll take a fresh look at whether there's wisdom in giving this level of arms to a country that has a history of violating arms embargoes, transferring weapons to Salafist militias inside the Middle East, and occasionally killing civilians with weapons we've already given them.”

On President-elect Joe Biden's foreign policy and national security nominees, Murphy said: “I love everyone individually who has been appointed to this team. I don't know all of them well, but those that I do are smart, they're principled, and many of them are very open to these new ideas. Specifically, I've talked to Tony Blinken at length about my belief that we have become, as I said in that thread, sclerotic in the tools that we deploy. 

Murphy also discussed his progressive foreign policy goals in the new Congress and new administration: “I mean, today, we essentially sell weapons to our friends and we sanction our adversaries. And we are sort of left with a really narrow set of options when we're trying to protect our interests around the globe. So I've made the case that we should be doubling, at the very least, the size of our smart power tools, right? Things like hard dollars to use to make countries energy independent of Russia, real resources to combat propaganda around the world, not just a couple extra dollars thrown to Twitter threads—and I think this team is open to it.

“Would I like to see somebody on the national security team that has not served in office before? Sure. I think it serves every president to have some folks at the upper echelon of their national security team, who come in as real outsiders. But the folks that have been named so far, I think, are open to some of these new ideas. But I will add that a lot of this is dependent upon Congress. The president plays the cards that he has in his hand, and it's the budget that gives the president cards. So long as Congress keeps approving budgets where we spend 20 times as much money on defense and intelligence as we do on the State Department and USAID, there's not much the president can do with that limited toolkit.”

Click here to listen to the interview in full.

###