Chuck Schumer's Iran Deal Flesh Wound

Chuck Schumer announced earlier this summer that he would vote against the JCPOA deal that President Obama struck with Iran and the other members of the P5+1.  We now know for sure with hindsight what many long-time Schumer critics had suspected at the time - that this was less an act of political courage and conviction than of cool political calculation.  Schumer at the time made clear that he would not seek to influence the votes of his fellow Democrats, including that of his junior NY Senator and political protégé Kirsten Gillibrand (who proclaimed her support of the deal nearly simultaneously with Schumer's announcement).  President Obama has now passed the finish line in his effort to persuade at least 34 Senate Democrats to support the Agreement and thereby ensure his ability to sustain a Presidential veto.

As I look at Senator Schumer, I am struck by two analogies.  One is the soldier who is able to get a ticket back home from the front by deliberately sustaining a flesh wound, just severe enough to gain a medical pass.

The analogy I like better is one we have all seen in the movies, and it connects more directly with the Senator's oft-cited self-appointed role, based on a play on his name in Hebrew, that he is the shomer, or guardian, of Israel (and I will add, the US).  So think of the soldier/security guard charged with standing as sentry protecting his king or queen.  The invaders arrive in force and heavily armed, and either out of mercy or collusion, provide him with the excuse of a credible black eye, as he stands aside to facilitate their mission's success.  Maybe he even sounds the general alarm just as the marauders are safely out of the castle with the king. 

The August 6 NY Times headline read "Chuck Schumer Opposes Iran Nuclear Deal . . . ". But did he?  Specifically, did he oppose the deal, or merely announce that he would be one vote out of 100 against the deal when the time came?  My dictionaries define "oppose" in fairly strong, active terms.  Here are a few: (1) to act against or provide resistance to; combat; (2) to stand in the way of; hinder, obstruct; (3) to set as an opponent or adversary.  Did he do any of these things?  Certainly not.  Pretty clearly, he did not use his political power as presumptive Democratic leader, nor does he even appear  to have used his powers of persuasion to win over colleagues.

We will never know whether Senator Schumer might have, if he tried, been able to win over enough Senators to deny President Obama a victory on the Iran deal.  The guard at the castle gate might have been able to thwart the invaders' entry by sounding the alarm sooner, gathering comrades, engaging them at greater personal risk to himself.  Debatable whether the guard's action sinks to the level of punishable cowardice, but let us at least remember not to award him any medals.