Yesterday, the Jerusalem Post reported that they had obtained an exclusive copy of a letter written by Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Representative Ed Royce (R-CA), and ranking member Representative Eliot Engel (D-NY), to President Obama, addressing Congress’ role in the lifting of sanctions pursuant to any comprehensive deal with Iran over its disputed nuclear program. In that letter it is suggested that Congressional approval is needed in order for any deal to take place. The letter further points out that the sanctions against Iran are not only nuclear related in nature.

So are they right? In a certain regard, addressed herein, yes. Although, I have often criticized commentators who are saying there can be no substantial sanctions relief without Congressional approval (which is not true), I have equally criticized parties who say that a comprehensive nuclear deal will have to lead to a lifting of all sanctions. If that’s the case then the talks between Iran and the P5+1 might as well just stop today.

The administration has a great deal of discretion in easing sanctions through it’s licensing authorities, and have the ability to issue waivers for certain activities when in the interest of national security in order to address the triggering of secondary sanctions. Further, and if all else fails, the administration can just simply not target parties under the authorities that have been provided by Congress, by not making the requisite findings. In short, it is my belief that there is a great deal of discretion in the hands of the Administration to provide substantial sanctions relief to the Iranians.

That said, there will not be a complete lifting of sanctions. As I have been saying since the Joint Plan of Action (“JPOA”) was agreed to in November 2013, the nuclear issue is not the only basis for imposition of sanctions. Aside from what Congress has stated in the sanctions legislation passed over the last four years, looking at the various executive orders that comprise the Iran sanctions program confirms that the concerns around Iran’s nuclear program is but one of a number of allegations that have served as basis for the imposition of sanctions. Even going back to the beginning of the Iranian trade embargo as we know it today, the national emergency cited for imposition of sanctions stemmed not only from Iran’s perceived proliferation efforts, but also from their alleged support of international terrorism, and their alleged involvement in disrupting the Middle East peace process. Since that time, subsequent Administrations have continued this national emergency, and also invoked other national emergencies in order to sanction parties in Iran for human rights abuses and sanctions evading.

Thus, while I don’t agree on the point that sanctions relief–not lifting, but relief–requires Congressional approval, I do believe Rep. Royce and Rep. Engel are right that there is more to sanctions than just the nuclear issue. So what will Iran’s response be? Well if we go by rhetoric there will be no deal without lifting of sanctions. However, I believe that if Iran can obtain substantial enough relief on the EU side that a deal can be agreed to. In many ways, it is the EU’s sanctions that really began to squeeze Iran economically due to their closer and more recent commercial ties with Iran. As such, getting sanctions relief far short of total lifting of U.S. sanctions, might be palatable to Iran depending on the scope and type of sanctions relief provided by the EU, and with assurances regarding, or relief from, U.S. secondary sanctions for EU firms who may once again commence dealings with Iran.