Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat who represents Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens, yesterday defended her opposition to the Iran Deal in defiance of President Obama– and got the name of a Middle East country wrong and also apparently misstated two Arab countries’ nuclear policies.
Wearing a firefighter’s coat (to signal her support for the Zadroga act to provide health benefits to 9/11 responders), Maloney expressed concern that the deal had caused “scratches” in the US relationship with Israel, which she said must be a non-partisan commitment for U.S. politicians. She went on to defend her opposition to the president on his signature foreign policy achievement:
“I didn’t think it [the deal] made the region any safer, and I didn’t think it prevented them from getting nuclear weapons. And I think the actions of Iran since then have proven it.”
She listed four reasons she continues to oppose the deal. In doing so, she put Yemen in Africa, called it Sudan:
They are hoping that the region will change in the future, but the ink was not even dry before they were announcing Death to America, Death to Israel. Osama bin Laden has taught us when they say they’re going to kill you, believe them…
Just after the deal was approved, they discovered more uranium [in Iran]…. They are now in the process of enriching that.
They were caught sending weapons since they signed the deal to the Houthis in the Sudan. They’ve been big exporters of terror in the region, Hamas and Hezbollah…
In fact, Sudan is on the Saudi side in Yemen. It sent troops there to oppose the Houthis.
Maloney then referred to “an arms race”
that has evolved since the agreement, with both Qatar, [and] the United Arab Emirates has now said that they’re no longer bound by their anti-nuclear proliferation agreements, that they’re going to start their nuclear program. And Saudi Arabia and Israel have both buying more arms. I don’t think that makes the region any safer.
The claim about the UAE is a talking point for Republican opponents of the deal. A Republican congressman said in October that a UAE official told him the Emirates intend to back out of its 2009 agreement with the US, the 123 deal, under which the US provides nuclear material to the country for peaceful energy production. It surely doesn’t signal an “arms race,” and UAE has denied the report. CBS reported:
the UAE Embassy in Washington sent a one-sentence email that said the “government has not formally changed its views or perspective on the 123 Agreement or commitments.” The UAE has said in the past that it welcomes the nuclear deal reached with Iran.
I have called both embassies to ask about Maloney’s claim, am awaiting a response.
Thanks to Jim Lobe, who spotted the mistakes.