Democratic Presidential Candidates and Iran

Trump’s foreign policy identity, both in the 2016 campaign and during his administration, has centered on Iran and the Obama administration’s “Iran Deal” from 2015. Some foreign policy experts saw the dismissal of John Bolton as a potential turning point in the administration’s aggressive policy towards Iran and that administration may lean towards non-interventionism; however, the current crisis over the attack on the Saudi Arabian facilities and the US attribution of the attack to Iran has elevated the debate to new immediacy. President Trump quickly responded to Iran with a threat of military action in response to the attack.

Much of the Democratic Presidential debates have not focused on foreign policy, but the United States’ policy towards Iran has pivotal implications for Iran, the Middle East generally, European foreign policy, as well as the choices Russia and China make in the region. As such, knowing the candidates’ positions towards Iran allows us to understand their goals, likely choices in a similar crisis, and the shape of their overall foreign policy agenda. To better understand their preferences, I have collected a summary of the top ten Democratic candidates’ stated positions towards Iran. I have attempted not to infer their positions directly where possible and link to where I found their articulated stances.

I used four categories for candidate positions based on either the decisions they made or if they have publicly discussed the issue since 2014. I ranked each candidate on an ordinal scale from 1-5 that starts at a dovish position of 1 to more hawkish position of 5 towards Iran. The topics are:

1. Does the candidate support the Iran Nuclear Agreement also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)?
2. Does the candidate support sanctioning Iran?
3. Does the candidate support military action against Iran?
4. Does the candidate believe that the 2001 “Authorization for Use of Military Force” can be used as the legal basis for a war against Iran? (4 point scale)

Here is a chart showing their relative hawkishness on each of the five areas. I have included a full table with citations and rankings the end of this article.

Of note, the scale for each question goes to five, but no candidate is above a three relative to a truly hardline position on Iran. Generally, every candidate that served in the House or the Senate in 2017, voted in favor of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act. The exception to this is Bernie Sanders. Most of the Democratic candidates vowed to repeal the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force; Biden and Harris both said that going to war with Iran under that act would be unlawful, but seemed to have stopped short of calling for its repeal. Notably, Biden threatened George W. Bush with impeachment if he attempted to go to war with Iran under the 2001 AUMF. The most variation comes with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action where candidates vary from going directly back to the agreement immediately to negotiating a better deal with more concessions on items such as Iran’s support for terrorism and changes in the sunset periods.

It is important to note that the table does not offer a fully nuanced portrayal of the candidates’ views but attempts to aggregate the main debates that a majority of the candidates have addressed. Two questions I would like to have more information on is whether they would label the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (something that Biden voted against during the Bush administration) and the candidates’ stance on Yemen.

US-Iranian relations will continue to be important beyond just the bilateral relationship as it shapes the regional and global foreign policies of Europe, Russia, China, as well as most of the minor powers in the international system. While voters tend to care less about foreign policy than they do domestic policy, the consequence of choice over foreign policy in a democracy has dramatic implications in domains that include economics, diplomacy, military strategy, nuclear proliferation, terrorism, regional stability, relationships with allies and rivals, and, importantly, human lives.

Coding decisions: The ranking from 1-5 for each category is:

1. Does the candidate support the Iran Nuclear Agreement also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)?
   • 1. Rejoin
   • 2. Rejoin if Iran complies
   • 3. Create “better deal” to join immediately
   • 4. Better deal with significant, one-sided concessions
   • 5. No deal.
2. Does the candidate support sanctioning Iran?
   • 1. No sanctions
   • 2. No sanctions unless they violate deal
   • 3. Voted for sanctions/supports current regime sanctions
   • 4. New Trump sanctions are appropriate
   • 5. Need even more sanctions/go after allies.
3. Does the candidate support military action against Iran?
   • 1. Opposed
   • 3. Support action to contain nuclear Iran
   • 5. Supports military response to current events/Saudi Arabia attack
4. Does the candidate believe that the 2001 “Authorization for Use of Military Force” can be used as the legal basis for a war against Iran?
   • 1. No, we should repeal the law
   • 2. No
   • 4. Possible with some conditions.
   • 5. Yes

Below is the table that includes the candidates’ relevant positions and links to those positions that I used to code their stances.

Top 5 Democratic Presidential Candidates on Iran