New Jersey’s congressional delegation is facing its most significant vote since it authorized sending American troops into war against Iraq. It’s the Iran nuclear deal and Congressman Leonard Lance has been hearing from constituents on both sides of that argument. NJTV News Chief Political Correspondent Michael Aron sat down with the congressman to find out more about the dissent behind the Iran deal.
Lance: Will Iran cheat in the first year or two? Perhaps not. But I think Iran will cheat at some point and regardless of that, this does not forever forestall Iran’s getting a nuclear weapon. At the very most it postpones it.
Aron: Isn’t postponement better than enabling them to get one as soon as they wish?
Lance: I think that if they had stayed at the negotiating table and we had stayed at the negotiating table we could have had a better agreement where they would never get a nuclear weapon.
Aron: But now that we’ve left the negotiating table, do you think we can go back to the negotiating table?
Lance: It will be difficult and that would require of course our disapproval in the Congress of the United States and I believe both houses of Congress will disapprove. But then that measure goes to the the president’s desk and he has the opportunity to veto our disapproval and the real question, Michael, is whether or not we can override his veto of our disapproval.
Aron: And what’s your feeling about that?
Lance: I don’t know. I haven’t counted noses. It’s always difficult to override a president of the United States and I am pleased that my views are not only the views of Republican members of Congress, but also some Democrats as well. Sen. [Chuck] Schumer has come out against the agreement, and Democratic members in the House — Steve Israel, Neil Lowry, Brad Sherman, Eliott Engle. I think this is bipartisan in nature — the opposition to the agreement.
Aron: You say that Iran is the leading sponsor of state terrorism — they’re not backing ISIS, they’re not backing Al-Qaeda, they’re not backing the Taliban. Those are the three major terrorist groups in the world today.
Lance: They have been put on the list as a leading sponsor of state terror repeatedly by the United States and they’re certainly backing Hezbollah and Hamas and other extremely dangerous groups. So I think it’s well known that they’re a leading, or perhaps the leading, state sponsor of terrorism — particularity in the Middle East. This is the view of our government. The primary focus of the treaty was not related to terrorism, it was related to the nuclear weapons issue but I don’ t think there is any dispute that Iran is a very bad actor in the world.
Aron: They say they’ve never started a war in 4,000 years.
Lance: I think that they want a nuclear weapon for the purpose of military action. There is really no other reason for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon and incidentally they will be able to continue their research on an ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile]. As the secretary of defense said, Ashton Carter, the ‘I’ in ICBM is intercontinental and there is no reason to develop an ICBM except for purposes of military action.