This month, after The New York Times first reported that US officials were visiting Caracas to discuss the possibility of talks with oil-rich Venezuela, the diplomatic gambit drew angry backlash from one senator in particular.
“The democratic aspirations of the Venezuelan people,” Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey said in a blunt statement, “are worth far more than a few thousand barrels of oil.”
These were harsh words coming from a member of the president’s own party who was furious that he had not been properly consulted during the trip. But they were emblematic of the New Jersey Democrat’s preeminent influence on some of the most politically radioactive topics in US foreign policy, current and former lawmakers, officials and Senate aides say. The administration quickly dismissed accusations that the trip to Caracas was part of an effort to find new sources of energy that could replace Russian oil or undermine the Venezuelan opposition.
“There is no dialogue between us and the regime,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said during an interrogation of journalists.
The episode is just the latest example of how Menendez, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, can set boundaries on issues from Iran to Venezuela. He is associated with well-informed pro-Israel groups in Washington and with politically active Cuban and Venezuelan American communities in South Florida. Sometimes in agreement with the administration, and often in conflict with it, he must always be treated with a healthy dose of respect and fear.
“He’s the one you need by your side no matter what, so they’re very careful,” said Juan Cruz, who served as senior director for the Western Hemisphere in the Trump administration.
Last year, in a nod to Menendez, the White House allowed him to suggest who should and should not be invited to an event with President Biden. The three people Menendez excluded were critics of Cuba’s decades-long economic embargo, which many on the left see as an example of a failed right-wing policy.
“Menendez has a very moralistic and adamant view of using sanctions to punish and improve human rights, regardless of the evidence,” said Christopher Sabatini, Senior Fellow for Latin America at Chatham House, a think tank in London.
At the same time, Menendez has been an important administration ally on a number of Biden priorities, from clearing the way for dozens of appointees the Republicans have tried to block to strengthening bipartisan consensus on the war in Ukraine. Senior administration officials consult with Menendez several times a month. His relationship with Biden has also improved significantly from the tense Obama era, allies say.
“Chairman Menendez is a partner in achieving our foreign policy goals, and this administration is taking his advice,” said Adrienne Watson, spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council.
In response to questions about tensions with the Biden administration, Menendez’s office vehemently dismissed the notion that he approached the chairmanship differently from previous bipartisan presidents.
Next fight with Menendez: Iran
Menendez’s influence could soon be tested again if and when the administration unveils its long-awaited restart of the Iran nuclear deal.
In recent days, officials have briefed House and Senate committee members on the status of the Vienna talks, and details of the 25-page agreement have begun to appear in the papers.
One of the latest obstacles, according to those present at the briefings, is Iran’s demand that the US no longer designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist organization.
Proponents of the deal say it means little in a practical sense because other sanctions are still being applied to the group. But the Biden administration will have to spend precious political capital defending the move at a time when it has little left.
“I’d like to see what that means in practice,” said Rep. Tom Malinowski, a New Jersey Democrat who said he was waiting for the text of the agreement. “But once Iran gets the bomb, our ability to counter their other malign activities will decrease.”
Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, said in an interview that he has seen “chilling” assessments of how close Iran is to producing weapons-grade uranium. Others, briefed on US intelligence estimates, say Iran could produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon in as little as two weeks, raising the risk that Israel could take military action.
“The consequences of not having a deal are dire,” Murphy said. “And there is no other practical way to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon other than diplomacy.”
Supporters of the deal say the main reason the crisis has reached this point is Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the original nuclear deal, which allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium above agreed levels.
But the Biden administration has also moved too slowly to engage Tehran upon taking office, fearing a Menendez retaliation on Capitol Hill.
“They didn’t want to lose supporters in Congress,” said Ali Vaez, an Iran expert at the International Crisis Group.
Now that the deal is closed, administration officials are dodging whether they think Congress should be allowed to renegotiate the deal. Under a bipartisan law passed in 2015, the Iran Nuclear Deal Review Act, the administration must submit the text of any “new” deal to Congress.
Menendez, who opposed the original nuclear deal in 2015 and has been critical of the current deal under discussion, has signaled that he will push for the Senate to have its say. In February, he teamed up with South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham to propose his own diplomatic solution to the nuclear standoff.
“There is no chance of getting Senator Menendez on board, and the alternative he is offering is not acceptable to the administration,” Vaes said. “I think it’s a lost cause.”
State Department officials warn that, as one of them put it, “an agreement is neither inevitable nor inescapable.” The administration is also still exploring its legal options for Congress to consider a potential deal that might not technically qualify as “new.”
If the Iran deal is put to a vote in the Senate, Menendez’s reaction will be critical. Republicans are likely to be unanimously opposed. The administration can still afford to lose a handful of Democrats because it would only take 41 votes to renew the agreement. But it may take some arm-twisting to garner enough votes to win.
Hawkish Maryland Senator Ben Cardin has already expressed concern about the delisting of the Revolutionary Guard. Other influential Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, such as Delaware’s Chris Koons, have said little in support of the new deal.
A defeat in the Senate could deal the president a devastating blow to one of his trademark foreign policy initiatives, proponents of the talks warn. And given Iran’s rapid progress towards weapons-grade uranium production, if diplomacy fails, the president could face the prospect of another conflict in the Middle East on top of a debilitating war in Ukraine.
If there is no deal, Vaez said, “I think it will escalate very quickly and the specter of war will appear in the spring.”
What to read
Final segment
We are interrupting this program
It is not uncommon for a senator questioning a candidate to interrupt him. At one point during the Supreme Court confirmation hearing this morning, Republican Senator Tom Tillis of North Carolina did just that, apologizing to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and explaining that he only had four minutes left.
But Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican of South Carolina, has gone to another level—one that has made interruptions, rather than Q&A, the main feature of his question line.
During Graham’s conversation with Jackson on Wednesday, she asked several times to be allowed to speak with Senator Richard J. Durbin, a Democrat and chairman of the Judiciary Committee who sometimes helped her. When Jackson spoke, Graham shook his head dismissively or fidgeted in his chair, trying to get up.
Near the end of her interrogation line, our colleague Katie Edmondson described “audible groans and noises of protest from many onlookers” when Graham interrupted her. When his time was up, he left the platform.
Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz later tried to outdo Graham by refusing to shut up when his time was up. When he asked Durbin why he wouldn’t let him answer his last question, Durbin said, “You won’t let her” answer anyway.
And what was Cruise’s excuse for more time? Durbin did not stop interrupting him.
Thanks for reading. See you tomorrow.
— Blake and Leah
Is there anything you think we are missing? Anything you want to see more? We would like to hear from you. Email us at [email protected].