CiF Watch prompts Guardian correction to claim about Iran Sanctions Bill

A Guardian report by Mairav Zonszein (‘Binyamin Netanyahu defiant over planned US Congress speech’, Feb. 9th) included the following claim regarding the new Iran Sanctions bill (S 1881) proposed in the Senate.


However, as multiple reports – including several in the Guardian – make clear, the bill (co-sponsored by 59 US Senators) calls for sanctions only after negotiations are concluded – and then, only if a deal is not reached (or if Iran reneges on the terms of an agreement).
Dan Roberts, writing in the Guardian on Feb 6, got it right:

Netanyahu and Boehner both fear that the suspension of Iranian sanctions during talks aimed at preventing it from developing nuclear weapons have weakened international resolve to contain the threat and would like to see Congress pass legislation authorising new sanctions if a deal is not reached.

And, a Guardian article by Saeed Kamali Dehghan on Feb. 3 was also quite clear:

In Washington, a bipartisan bill co-authored by senator Robert Menendez, a Democrat, and senator Mark Kirk, a Republican, seeks further sanctions on Iran if the ongoing negotiations fail to reach a comprehensive agreement by the end of June

Here’s the precise language from the actual bill:

iran sanctions

Following communication with the Guardian, they agreed to revise the passage. 
Here’s the new passage, with an addendum noting the correction:
We commend Guardian editors for the prompt correction.

Written By
More from Adam Levick
Guardian again whitewashes the extremism of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP)
For the second time in little over a year, the Guardian has...
Read More
0 replies on “CiF Watch prompts Guardian correction to claim about Iran Sanctions Bill”