Obama: 'I am confident Iran deal meets security needs'

ANKARA

President Barack Obama has hailed Tuesday's Iran nuclear-program agreement reached by the P5+1 group of world powers and the Islamic Republic.

"This deal cuts off every path Iran might take to creating nuclear weapons," Obama said in a televised speech.

"It meets our national security needs, and those of our allies," he added.

However, Obama warned that he would veto any domestic U.S. legislation that might undermine the agreement.

"The United States has negotiated from a position of strength and principle," Obama said. "We have stopped the spread of nuclear weapons in this region, the most volatile region in the world."

"I welcome the scrutiny that Congress and the American people will bring to this deal," Obama said.

"I have, many times, been forced to consider the idea of using armed force to restrict Iran's nuclear program," Obama continued, adding: "Happily, a diplomatic solution made that unnecessary."

"Put simply," the president said, "no deal means the chance of more war in the Middle East."

Obama reminded opponents of the pact that "we don't make deals like this with our friends." He compared the deal with those made with the Soviet Union in past decades.

"This deal demonstrates that American diplomacy can bring about real and meaningful change, change that makes our country and the world safer and more secure," Obama said.

Obama calls Netanyahu after Iran deal signed

President Barack Obama spoke Tuesday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after a deal was reached regarding Iran’s nuclear program, according to the White House.   

During a telephone call with Netanyahu, Obama underscored his administration’s commitment to Israel’s security, saying the deal would not diminish the "concerns regarding Iran's support for terrorism and threats toward Israel." 

He also noted that a joint action plan would "prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon while ensuring the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program going forward." 

Secretary of Defense Ash Carter’s visit next week to Israel is a reflection of the unprecedented level of security cooperation between the U.S. and Israel, Obama said.

Following the announcement of the landmark agreement, Netanyahu described it as “a huge mistake of historic proportions.”

Under the terms, he asserted, “Iran will receive hundreds of billions of dollars, which will enable it to continue its terror and aggression in the region and the world.”

Apparently unconvinced, Republican House Speaker John Boehner said that the deal “is unacceptable”.

“It’s going to hand a dangerous regime billions of dollars in sanctions relief while paving the way for a nuclear Iran,” Boehner told reporters on Capitol Hill. “If in fact it is as bad of a deal as I think it is at this moment, we will do everything we can to stop it.”

Sen. John McCain, Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a statement that all signs indicate that the long-sought after accord is a "bad deal".

"Ultimately, the problem with this agreement is that it is built far too much on hope – on the belief that somehow the Iranian government will fundamentally change in the next several years," he said. "This is delusional and dangerous."

Cautious reaction in US media to Iran nuclear deal

U.S. media on Tuesday largely viewed the landmark deal between Iran and world powers on Tehran's nuclear program as a milestone in Iran's relations with the international community, but voiced reservations about its details.

"Republicans in Congress and their hardline counterparts in Tehran will still try to prevent the deal's implementation. But they are unlikely to succeed", it added.

Congress has 60 days to scrutinize the deal, but President Barack Obama said he would veto any move to block its implementation.

"Mr. Obama looks to have enough Democratic senators on his side to sustain his ability to veto any hostile congressional resolution. It is almost inconceivable that Iran's supreme leader will now allow the work of his negotiators to unravel," said the Economist. 

The New York Times' Editorial Board said the deal appeared sound and clearly in the interest of the U.S., the countries that drafted it and Israel, adding that it must be heavily scrutinized.

"Agreeing on the nuclear deal is just the first step", the daily said. 

"Congress gets to review and vote on it. Powerful forces, like Mr. [Benjamin] Netanyahu, have vowed to defeat it and Mr. Obama may have to make good on his vow to veto any resolution of disapproval. It would be irresponsible to squander this chance to rein in Iran’s nuclear program."

Focusing on the accord's potential repercussions in the Middle East, David E. Sanger from the New York Times said the deal may have "unintended consequences" regarding U.S. foreign policy.

"Both Israel and Saudi Arabia see a reconciliation as a threat. They fear that it will help Iran gain money, power and influence—and that it could be the opening wedge of a broader realignment of American interests in the region", he said.

Many commentators believe many of the conflicts in the Middle East including in Syria, Iraq and Yemen carry the undertones of a proxy war between Sunni Arab states, which are traditional U.S. allies, and Iran, a predominantly Shia country.

"For Mr. Obama and his successor, managing that fear may become as complex as managing Iran," Sanger wrote.

Similarly, the editorial board of The Washington Post warned that one effect of the deal may be an increase in "sectarian bloodshed wracking the region, as well as the conventional threat to Israel”.

"When embargoes on arms and missile sales to Iran expire in five and eight years, that threat could further escalate, and Tehran could seek missiles capable of striking U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf or reaching the U.S. homeland," the Post said.

"Mr. Obama sketched a dark picture of the alternative to the agreement, in which the world would refuse to join in sanctions, Iran would step up its nuclear activities and the risk of war would grow", the daily said, adding that, with the deal now done, its rejection by Congress would likely create the unfavorable scenario the president describes.