The White House is getting a cheering section going for the Iran deal — thanks to a ramped-up series of briefings to allies who can make the case from the outside.

Diplomats, scientists and other activists began making their own arguments Monday for the preliminary nuclear deal reached last week, releasing statements that praised the agreement and urged lawmakers to give negotiators a chance to pursue a comprehensive accord.


The words of support came as President Barack Obama and his aides are trying to sell the framework deal to members of Congress, especially senators from both parties who have said they want to have some oversight of the agreement. Activists in favor of the deal say they’re hoping congressional leaders will hold off on legislation that they fear could scuttle future talks.

White House aides say they’re reaching out to allies and experts to explain the deal – not to tell them what to say, but to make sure they’re fully informed about the agreement.

“I think it’s fair to say we are engaging all manner of outside experts and groups so that they understand the deal and our view of different legislation, and they make their own determinations about how to be heard,” said one White House official.

In one statement, a group of 30 U.S. specialists on nuclear security endorsed the framework as a “vitally important step forward” that will “strengthen U.S. security and that of our partners in the region.”

“We urge policymakers in key capitals to support the deal and the steps necessary to ensure timely implementation and rigorous compliance with the agreement,” wrote the signatories, who included Robert Einhorn, a former State Department official and past negotiator on the Iran talks and former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Thomas R. Pickering.

Pickering and Einhorn also were among 50 former diplomats, defense officials and political leaders who signed a separate statement which, in more cautious language, urged Congress to stay patient and “to take no action that would impede further progress or undermine the American negotiators’ efforts.” The statement was released by The Iran Project, an independent organization that tries to improve U.S.-Iran ties.

Rushed action by Congress could derail negotiations, “creating the perception that the U.S. is responsible for the collapse of the agreement; unraveling international cooperation on sanctions; and triggering the unfreezing of Iran’s nuclear program and the rapid ramping up of Iranian nuclear capacity,” declares the statement, which listed former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former GOP Sen. Richard Lugar, a foreign policy mentor to Obama when he was a senator, among its signers. “Such a situation could enhance the possibility of war.”

Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, said “there is loose coordination going on between organizations and experts who support the framework deal.” But he and others insisted they are not taking marching orders from the West Wing.

“They don’t give us talking points. They do convey key messages,” said Jamal Abdi of the National Iranian American Council.

Even with the low-pressure sales pitch, the White House engagement with such groups has intensified since the deal was announced Thursday.

“There has been a pretty good amount of outreach in the last few days,” said one member of an outside group that has participated in the briefings. “There’s a big difference between inviting one person from each organization to the White House … [and] going out and actually saying, ‘I want to brief everyone on your team. When’s the best time for you?’”

The administration hasn’t tried to give these groups talking points, the person said, and there haven’t been any big secrets that have been revealed at the briefings, but they’ve served their purpose by getting the groups interested in speaking out. “It’s less about asking us to do anything and more that the discussion around the table turns to, ‘We need to really hammer home on this point.’”

The Obama administration kept up its own public sales efforts on Monday, with Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz giving a detailed presentation during the daily briefing at the White House and Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes making a round of TV appearances, from CNN to Israeli TV.

Meanwhile, the advocacy group Win Without War posted a collection of endorsements from a wide variety of groups – including The Atlantic Council, the Ploughshares Fund, the National Security Network, the Center for a New American Security, and the United Methodist Church’s General Board of Church and Society.

It also urged supporters to “Call Congress and Seal the Deal.” The group posted the Capitol switchboard telephone number and provided a script for would-be callers that describes the agreement as “the best way to cut off Iran’s pathways to a nuclear weapon.” It also suggests that they say they oppose a bill by Sens. Bob Corker and Bob Menendez that would require congressional approval for the deal.

Also on Monday, NIAC, the Arab American Institute and J Street, a left-leaning Jewish organization, released a statement arguing that the preliminary deal “may provide an important first step towards deescalating regional tensions and pave the way for resolving the many conflicts that still persist.”

And Samuel R. Berger, a former national security adviser to President Bill Clinton, wrote an opinion piece for POLITICO Magazine that dismissed the idea that there’s a stronger deal to be had: “There is no second bite at this apple. This is a good deal. We should not be distracted by talk of a better one.”

The framework has received heavy criticism from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who views Iran as a mortal threat to his country and says the deal does not do enough to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon. Organizations such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee have blasted the framework agreement.

According to media reports, Israeli officials have been circulating a list of questions aimed at U.S.-led negotiators involved in the talks with Iran. The queries reportedly include “What message does it send when it gives such far-reaching concessions to a regime that for years has defied [U.N. Security Council] resolutions? ” and “Will the deal not encourage nuclear proliferation in the Middle East?”

Kate Gould, a lobbyist with the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a Quaker organization, said she’s been hearing more interest from faith-based groups who want to get involved in the wake of the announcement last week. She said the primary focus now was on preventing the Corker legislation from coming to a vote.

“I’m sure there’s going to be a much bigger push coming up,” she said.