Kerry's Iran Talks: Illegal Or Just Unconventional?

John Kerry, the former US Secretary of State, has been accused of breaking the Logan Act by holding private communications with Iranian officials. The Logan Act, an arcane statute from 1799, penalises private individuals for negotiating or collaborating with foreign governments on issues involving the US without federal permission. Kerry has admitted to corresponding with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif several times during the Trump Administration using encrypted messaging applications. However, legal scholars question the merits of the accusation, and Kerry himself has denied the claims.

John Kerry's connection to Iranian officials

Personal Connections:

Kerry's personal connections to Iran have been a subject of discussion. In 2015, it was revealed that Kerry's daughter, Dr. Vanessa Bradford Kerry, is married to an Iranian-American physician, Dr. Brian (Behrooz) Vala Nahed. While Dr. Nahed is a natural-born US citizen who has never been to Iran, his parents were born in Iran and immigrated to the US decades ago. It was also alleged that Kerry concealed his son-in-law's Iranian heritage during his Senate confirmation hearing for Secretary of State. However, these claims were later refuted, and it was noted that the information about his daughter's marriage was publicly available.

Professional Interactions:

John Kerry has had professional interactions with Iranian officials in his capacity as a US diplomat. As Secretary of State under President Barack Obama, Kerry played a key role in negotiating the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). He worked closely with Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran's foreign minister at the time, who was the chief negotiator for Iran. Kerry's dealings with Zarif have been scrutinized, with some alleging that the two had a close relationship that may have influenced the nuclear deal negotiations.

Post-Public Office Interactions:

After leaving public office, Kerry continued to engage with Iranian officials, specifically with former Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif. In 2023, during congressional testimony, Kerry acknowledged that he had communicated with Zarif "three or four times" during the Trump administration using encrypted messaging applications. He also met with Zarif at the United Nations General Assembly and the Munich Security Conference as a private citizen. These interactions raised concerns among some US politicians, who accused Kerry of potentially violating the Logan Act by engaging in unauthorized communications with a foreign government. Kerry defended his actions by citing the importance of "shadow diplomacy" in preventing conflicts, such as the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Political Criticism:

Kerry's interactions with Iranian officials have drawn criticism from political opponents, particularly those aligned with the Republican Party. Congressman Mike Waltz, along with other Republican congressmen, sent a letter to Kerry in 2024, requesting all private correspondence with Zarif during the Trump administration and accusing him of undermining US interests and emboldening a state sponsor of terrorism. They also expressed concern that Kerry's actions may have sabotaged President Trump's maximum pressure campaign against Iran and contributed to Iran's financial support for Hamas' terrorist attacks against Israel.

In conclusion, John Kerry's connection to Iranian officials spans both personal and professional realms. His interactions with Iranian diplomats, particularly his involvement in the Iran nuclear deal, have been scrutinized and criticized by some. However, Kerry has defended his actions as consistent with diplomatic efforts to prevent conflict and promote stability. The debate surrounding Kerry's connections illustrates the complex nature of US-Iran relations and the ongoing discussions about the appropriate approach to engagement with Iran.

The Logan Act

The Act states that:

> Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than three years, or both.

The intent behind the Act is to prevent unauthorized negotiations from undermining the government's position. It is important to note that the Act does not abridge the right of a citizen to seek redress for any injury sustained from a foreign government or its agents.

While there have been accusations and discussions of invoking the Logan Act, there have been very few indictments and no convictions under this law. The Act has faced constitutional challenges due to concerns about free speech protections and the vagueness of certain terms.

The role of Congress

In defence of Kerry, it is important to note that he was the US Secretary of State at the time and was engaged in official diplomatic negotiations regarding Iran's nuclear program. While Congress has a role to play in approving international agreements, the agreement in question was an "executive agreement," which does not require congressional approval but can be changed by a future president. This distinction is crucial to understanding the dynamic between Kerry and Congress.

Kerry himself accused Senator Tom Cotton of spreading false information about the role of Congress in the Iran nuclear deal negotiations. Cotton had penned an open letter to Iranian leaders, signed by 46 Republican colleagues, claiming that any deal signed by the Obama administration could be revoked by a future president or Congress. Kerry refuted this, stating that Congress cannot change an executive agreement, but he acknowledged that a future president may have a different view and could alter the agreement.

To increase oversight and ensure transparency, Congress can take several steps. These include summoning government witnesses, administering oaths to tell the truth, and reminding witnesses of their legal duty to provide truthful information. Additionally, Congress can request that witnesses express their views and opinions, especially those related to foreign countries or multilateral organizations, as authorized by federal law.

In summary, while some members of Congress were critical of Kerry's actions and accused him of violating the Logan Act, the dynamic between Kerry and Congress is nuanced due to the nature of executive agreements and the role of the legislative branch in approving international deals. Congress has tools at its disposal to increase oversight and transparency, but ultimately, the executive branch has significant autonomy in negotiating and implementing certain types of agreements.

The Iranian nuclear deal

Under the JCPOA, Iran agreed to:

• Eliminate its stockpile of medium-enriched uranium
• Cut its stockpile of low-enriched uranium by 98%
• Reduce the number of its gas centrifuges by about two-thirds
• Enrich uranium only up to 3.67% and not build heavy-water facilities for 15 years
• Limit uranium enrichment to a single facility using first-generation centrifuges for 10 years
• Allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regular access to all its nuclear facilities to monitor compliance

In return, Iran would receive relief from nuclear-related sanctions imposed by the United States, European Union, and United Nations Security Council.

The JCPOA was seen as a historic deal that would prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and increase the breakout time—the time it would take for Iran to gather enough fissile material to build a weapon—from 2-3 months to 12 months or more. However, the deal was criticized and opposed in the United States, Israel, and Saudi Arabia.

In 2018, the United States, under the Trump administration, withdrew from the JCPOA and reimposed sanctions on Iran as part of a "maximum pressure" campaign. This led to a deterioration in the Iranian economy and an increase in regional tensions. Iran responded by gradually breaching the deal's restrictions and expanding its nuclear program.

Efforts to revive the JCPOA began in 2021 under the Biden administration, with negotiations ongoing as of 2024.

The legality of Kerry's actions

Kerry's actions have been called into question on several occasions, with some arguing that he broke the law by communicating with Iranian officials. One of the main issues raised is whether Kerry violated the Logan Act, which prohibits US citizens from negotiating with foreign governments without authorisation. Kerry admitted to corresponding with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif during the Trump administration, using encrypted messaging applications. He also met with Zarif at the United Nations General Assembly and the Munich Security Conference as a private citizen.

Kerry defended his actions by citing historical examples of "shadow diplomacy", such as back-channel conversations between Attorney General Robert Kennedy and Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin during the Cuban Missile Crisis. However, critics argue that Kerry's case is different because he was neither an Attorney General nor acting under the authorisation of the President. They also highlight the sensitive nature of Iran-US relations and the potential impact of Kerry's discussions on US policy and national security.

In addition to the Logan Act debate, Kerry's promise to Iran as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has also been scrutinised. Kerry pledged that senior Obama Administration officials would "make every effort to support the successful implementation" of the Iran deal, including in their public statements. This raised concerns about the suppression of truthful testimony by Administration officials summoned to testify before Congress on the deal. To address this, Congress can take steps such as issuing compulsory process to summon witnesses and administering oaths to ensure truthful testimony, regardless of Kerry's promise to Iran.

Frequently asked questions