Top Five Foreign Policy Challenges for 2015

Tomorrow, the new Congress is set to begin its first session amid a flurry of near- and mid-term foreign policy challenges that it will have the ability to affect for better or worse. Issues looming large include negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program as conservatives once again consider new counterproductive sanctions, the war against the Islamic State as American forces are being exposed to increased risk, the fate of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility as the transfer of prisoners picks up pace, managing America’s security interest in sustained nonproliferation cooperation with Russia even as Moscow misbehaves in Eastern Europe, and potentially divisive trade agreements under negotiation. On all of these issues, an effective relationship between Congress and the Obama Administration could prove the difference between success and failure.

Heading into 2015, the top issues are:

Reaching a nuclear deal with Iran and avoiding congressional action that would lower the prospects of successful negotiations: As the P5+1 nuclear negotiations with Iran continue, further extending the freeze of Iran’s nuclear enrichment, members of Congress are threatening again to derail the talks by imposing new sanctions. “I think we’ll have a supermajority, a veto-proof majority, to impose additional sanctions on Iran and to require the administration to come before Congress for approval of any deal,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) told NPR last week. This weekend, Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) also urged new sanctions if the talks fail, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said last week that the Senate could vote on new sanctions legislation this month. The push for sanctions comes despite the warnings of the Obama Administration, which has consistently stressed that such a bill could eliminate the chances of reaching a deal. As National Security Advisor Susan Rice warned last month, new sanctions would “blow up” negotiations. “The P5+1 would fracture, the international community would blame the United States rather than Iran for the collapse of the negotiations, and the Iranians would conclude that there’s little point in pursuing this process at the negotiating table,” said Rice. [Marco Rubio via the Hill, 12/31/14. Susan Rice via the Hill, 12/2/14]

Debating and voting on an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) as operations against the Islamic State escalate and expose U.S. troops to risk: Last week, it was reported that Iraq’s Ayn al-Asad airbase in Anbar Province came under repeated attack by Islamic State militants. Approximately 300 U.S. forces were stationed at the facility and were withdrawn by helicopter without incurring any casualties. The event, however, highlights the need for Congress to deliberate and vote on an AUMF so that U.S. forces exposed to risk are operating fully within the rule of law and with maximum political legitimacy. NSN has repeatedly outlined options for a responsible and effective counter-Islamic State AUMF that would be specifically tailored for the conflict, and experts and policymakers have picked up on or cited this work. During debate in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) at the end of last year, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said,“Many have made the argument that we’ve added too many limitations, there should be no limitations, they’ve argued historically that we haven’t done this. Well, the National Security Network looked back at all of the uses of authorization of force since the beginning of the republic, and they found that 60% of those actually did have a geographic limitation on them.” At the end of last year, the Democrat-led SFRC did pass a resolution containing limitations but the process must now start over in the new Republican-controlled Congress.

Closing the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and stopping its needless damage to American power and wasting of resources: The transfer of 15 cleared detainees to three countries in December brought the total number of transfers in 2014 to 28, and the Washington Post reports that the Obama Administration is looking to accelerate the transfer of the 59 remaining cleared inmates in 2015. This is long overdue and a strong step towards closing down the prison. As Adm. James Stavridis (Ret.) wrote last month, “For a variety of reasons, we should close the detention facility…While the facility today is thoroughly inspected (including frequent visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross, media, legislators), it retains a highly negative reputation around the world. With fewer than 200 detainees remaining, it is increasingly difficult to justify the manpower and expense of keeping the facility open.” [James Stavridis via Foreign Policy, 12/19/14]

Managing an increasingly complex relationship with Russia and preventing backsliding on critical nonproliferation agreements: In addition to Russia’s actions in eastern Ukraine and Crimea, concerns in Washington are likely to continue to focus on Russia’s apparent violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which bans ground launched ballistic and cruise missiles with conventional or nuclear warheads that have ranges between 300 and 3,400 miles – a class of weapons that are cheap, precise, and effective. Russia has apparently violated the INF Treaty by limited testing – but not producing or deploying – a prohibited ground-launched cruise missile. In the last Congress, a number of conservatives called for the United States to potentially abandon the INF Treaty. However, as James Acton of the Carnegie Endowment explains, “If the United States were to withdraw from the treaty now – or develop its own prohibited weapons and thus hand Russia the perfect excuse to abrogate – it would be doing Moscow a big favor. With the INF Treaty out of the way, Russia would probably go on to deploy its new cruise missile, causing serious alarm amongst U.S. allies in Europe and possibly in Asia, too.” Instead, as the New York Times editorializes, “the Obama administration should continue pursuing a diplomatic solution to the treaty dispute and resist the growing pressure in Congress for quick retaliation, which could make the situation worse. And it should explore other forms of pressure, like economic punishment and deployment of new defenses against cruise missiles.” [James Acton, 8/6/14. New York Times, 1/1/15]

Modifying and approving trade deals likely to arise during this Congress, and ensuring that any deals effectively address domestic concerns about growing income inequality: The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP) are the flagship initiatives of the Obama Administration’s economic statecraft strategy towards sustaining American global economic advantage. The trade and investment agreements are broad, with the TPP encompassing roughly 40% of global trade and the T-TIP encompassing about half of global GDP. While both agreements are still being negotiated, final deals would require congressional approval. But a good deal that strengthens America’s economy will require significant labor protection. It’s unclear that the Administration is negotiating with U.S. labor fully in mind – but it’s even more doubtful that a conservative Congress can advocate on labor’s behalf, though the room for constructive engagement remains. Speaking on the T-TIP, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka voiced his union’s point of view, “Trade policy for the privileged few must end. TTIP must work for the people, or it won’t work at all.” On the TPP, the AFL-CIO has laid out that they have “provided the administration with ideas about how to improve the U.S. trade positions so they work for the 99%, not just the 1%… And while negotiations are not yet complete, the publicly available information is concerning for workers.” The AFL-CIO has expressed more specific concerns about the TPP as well, for example, that “It is not yet clear that all the TPP countries will commit to enforceable labor standards. But America’s workers can’t go backward: we expect labor commitments that significantly improve upon the Bush-era deals.” [Richard Trumka, 5/21/14. AFL-CIO statement on labor rights and the TPP, accessed 1/5/15]

Photo Credit: [Flickr, Architect of the Capitol, 12/15/14]