The contrast between President Obama and the Republican majority in the US Senate on the agreement with Iran could also have important consequences in the financial field, notes a recent analysis by John Alterman of CSIS (one of the major American think tanks).
The deal is a good compromise, probably the best that could be achieved among the multiple interests of the negotiators, not only Iran and the USA, but also Russia, China, Japan and European countries. In the worst case scenario, the one married to the Israeli government, it postpones the risk of Iran's nuclear rearmament by 15-20 years, otherwise calculated in a few months, and reconfirms the validity of the Non-Proliferation Treaty: an important result, having regard to the failure of the last Treaty Review Conference last month.
Now that it has been approved by the United Nations Security Council, its last obstacle is in the vote of the US Senate, which could scuttle it for mainly domestic policy regions. However, the consequences of such a decision, if successful (and to date it still does not seem that the Republicans have gathered the necessary votes to overcome the presidential veto on the rejection of the agreement) would have serious consequences, not only political and perhaps military, but also financial.
Politically this would widen the distance between the US and its allies and strengthen the Russian-Chinese axiswould probably give new breath to Middle Eastern conflict and therefore also to nuclear proliferation in the region, outlining high-risk scenarios.
Financially, it would have significant consequences, undermining the central role played up to now in the world by the American financial and banking system. If the USA, following the vote by the Senate, tried to apply the strong sanctions envisaged by the law, they would act in stark opposition to the international consensus and this would trigger a race to create and develop strong financial instruments independent from American eyes and above all from the of legal interference by US domestic agencies. Parallel structures, like the new one Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank created by China (and many US allies) would multiply to support a parallel international banking system independent of the US. This would not only diminish America's prestige (and soft power), but it would severely reduce America's ability to fight crime and terrorism and enforce effective economic sanctions.
At stake today, therefore, is much more than the relationship between Iran and Israel, there is the role of the USA in the international system.
