Rand Paul the diplomat

Some Republicans were clearly itching to mix it up with Secretary of State John Kerry at Thursday’s big Senate hearing on the Iran deal, accusing him of getting “bamboozled” and vowing to scuttle the agreement if they get the chance.

Then there was Rand Paul.


The Kentucky senator and 2016 presidential contender adopted a more dispassionate, even diplomatic stance as he pecked away at the agreement during the Foreign Relations Committee hearing with Kerry, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew Thursday. In doing so he contrasted himself not just with his more bombastic GOP colleagues but also with more hawkish rivals in the GOP presidential race, such as Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who are making their plans to undo the agreement a central plank of their foreign policy platforms.

Instead of launching into a monologue, Paul asked measured questions about why sanctions will be lifted so quickly under the agreement and whether Iran has any plans to create a nuclear bomb.

Though Paul is distinctly to the left of most 2016 GOP hopefuls on foreign policy, the Kentucky Republican was one of the first Republicans to publicly announce opposition to the deal last week, despite keeping what he called an “open mind” as the agreement came together. He dislikes the sanctions language in the pact and fears Iran can still develop a nuclear bomb.

But the libertarian-leaning senator made clear that he prefers a diplomatic settlement with Iran. The only other committee Republican who sounded that conciliatory was Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.).

Paul came in and out of the hearing room as he calculated when his turn would come up. Nearly four hours after the hearing began he finally got his chance. He didn’t raise his voice, allowed Kerry to finish his thoughts and avoided the explosive rhetoric of his colleagues. Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the committee chairman, told Kerry he was “fleeced” by Iran; Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho) used the term “bamboozled.”

“I continue to support a negotiated solution and think it preferable to war. I think a military solution in all likelihood would accelerate the possibility of them having nuclear weapons,” Paul said. “However it does have to be a good deal and I think that’s the debate we have.”

Combined with his support for negotiations, Paul’s stance against the deal is an attempt to thread the needle of criticisms he’s received from both ends of the party for either being too dovish or straying too far from the libertarian roots of his father, Ron Paul. And he didn’t exactly go easy on Kerry, challenging the secretary on whether phased sanctions relief was ever a part of the negotiations.

“My problem is that there’s a great deal of credence we’re hearing on snapback sanctions as this lever to get them to comply. Secretary Lew talked about there being a phased reduction in sanctions, that’s not exactly the way we read this agreement,” Paul said. “My preference would have been that there may be more of truly a phased reduction over a many-year period.”

Talking over Paul at times, Kerry said instead of a sanction time schedule based on calendar days, the administration extracted concessions that require Iran to end far-reaching components of its nuclear infrastructure. Lawmakers estimate that will occur in March or April, which means sanctions relief that comes too fast for Paul and most other Republicans.

“When that is done, we lift the fundamental components of international banking sanctions that are the heart of what brought them to the table,” Kerry said.

Paul probed whether Kerry trusted the Iranian negotiators, agreeing with the assertion that the agreement is not based on trust. But he questioned Kerry’s assertion in the hearing that if Tehran leaders follow the deal then it will deny Iran the tools to build a nuclear weapon. Reading quotes by Ayatollah Khamenei, Paul alleged that the Iranians did not actually agreed to refrain from developing such a bomb.

The administration, Paul said, claims “this would prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon and the Ayatollah is saying the opposite.”

Kerry said the Ayatollah is merely trying to show it can’t be bullied by the United States, not that he wants a nuclear bomb.

“The Supreme Leader’s quote is in this [nuclear deal] document that Iran will never go after a nuclear weapon and the Iranians happily put that in. And the intel community will tell you they have made zero decision,” Kerry told Paul.

While Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) had badgered Kerry over his long answers that ate up senators’ limited questioning time of seven minutes apiece, Paul seemed satisfied to let Kerry do most of the talking. And after he got his answer on the nuclear question, Paul said he was done, leaving about 30 seconds left on the clock. He then walked out of the hearing room and declined to elaborate to the media.