The new foreign policy players forged by the Iran nuclear deal

The Iran deal rose and fell in Congress on some longstanding divisions — but the debate also showcased some new, influential foreign policy voices emerging in both parties.

Particularly in the Senate, the deal challenged lawmakers to devise a process for Congress to decide whether the agreement should be implemented through a rare and unorthodox resolution of disapproval vote. The two-month review process also gave lawmakers a chance to influence not only how their colleagues would vote but also how they explained their positions on a major foreign policy issue.

Whiles seasoned foreign policy players — such as Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) — played prominent roles, what follows are senators who emerged from the Iran debate with more influence, or at least more recognition, and whose stars may rise in future foreign policy battles.

Ben Cardin (D-Md.): Cardin came into the Iran deal the way an understudy Broadway starlet gets her big break – unpredictably and at the last minute.

The third ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee inherited the top spot when Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) was slapped with an indictment and then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) decided to stick with her top spot on the Environment and Public Works committee. A few weeks later, Congress voted to give itself review power over the pact in a bill Cardin and Corker drafted — and two months after that, the actual deal was dropped into Congress’ lap.

Unlike other influential senators, Cardin tried hard to not show his hand — and made it to early September before revealing he would oppose the deal. His break with the party and the president has not, however, led to any public tensions and no one has accused him of trying to unduly influence members to join him.

Instead, Cardin — along with Corker — is earning bipartisan praise for handling a tricky situation fairly even-handedly. Observers think it’s a good sign for the new partnership atop the Foreign Relations Committee.

Chris Coons (D-Del.): Coons played harder to get. He was lobbied heavily, deliberated at length, hedged his vote until the start of September and then when he did announce his position, gave as much, if not more, time to the deal’s flaws as its strengths.

Coons appears to now be taking this moment and trying to turn it into something broader.  In announcing his support, the senator said he backed the deal “despite its flaws because it is the better strategy for the United States to lead a coalesced global community” in combating the spread of nuclear weapons.

This week, Coons, who is known around Congress as an Africa expert, plans to take that message even further in a speech outlining the implications of the agreement on U.S. policy. He’ll advocate for the U.S. to lean further into a cooperative approach to solving the world’s crises.

Bob Corker (R-Tenn.): The Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman took the reins of the panel at the beginning of the year and quickly found himself at the center of an explosive battle with sky-high geopolitical consequences.

It was up to Corker, who many senators refer to as a careful pragmatist, to carve out a role for Congress to review the deal over the objections of the White House — and to then manage that review — amid frustration among his Republicans colleagues over their inability to kill the agreement.

In the past, Corker has broken with the Republicans on foreign policy – such as in 2010, when he supported the New START treaty and earlier this year when he refused to sign Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-Ark.) open letter to Iran’s leaders.

This time, Corker stuck with his party and strongly opposed the deal. But his handling of the pact drew praise from both sides of the aisle, suggesting that Corker solidified the influence that comes with his chairmanship.

Tom Cotton (R-Ark.): Cotton may not have won the Iran battle, but he certainly set the early tone for deal critics — one that continues to resonate. Back in March, Cotton was criticized and ridiculed when he penned an open letter signed by 46 other Republican senators to Iranian leaders, giving them a primer on the bill-making process and reminding them that a future Congress and president could roll back the deal. The letter was slammed by Democrats and some Republicans as inappropriate, but it made Cotton an instant star with other conservatives.

More recently, Cotton, along with Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), originated the frenzy over “secret side deals” between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) — ancillary arrangements that are traditionally confidential. Cotton argued that lawmakers’ lack of access to the documents meant Obama wasn’t following the law,  leading many Republicans to argue that the law’s 60-day review period never began. This line of attack has now overtaken the debate over the deal’s merits and has House Republicans threatening to drag the Obama administration into court.

Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.): His prominence in this Iran debate came through his silence. For weeks, he refused to get on board with Republicans trashing the deal, and while he would ultimately choose not to side with the Democrats, his protracted deliberations led many to take a closer look at Flake as someone who weighs the merits over the politics on such a weighty issue.

It’s not the first time Flake has bucked his party on foreign policy measures: His long-held stance on Cuba made him a friend of the Obama administration during the diplomatic unfreezing with the island nation (he was the sole Republican in the congressional delegation who went to the flag-raising ceremony over the reopened U.S. embassy in Havana, smack dab in the middle of the deal debate). He’s  also been a go-to figure for Republican and Democratic presidents seeking to negotiate immigration reform. His holdout stance on Iran only solidified that reputation as one of the GOP’s few remaining willing middlemen, which is only likely to make him a more sought-after figure going forward.

Tim Kaine (D-Va.): Kaine was one of the first swing-state Democrats to offer his full-throated support for the deal. He sounded positive notes about the diplomatic process leading to the deal prior to his formal announcement in early August.

But the influence boost Kaine got from the Iran experience isn’t just because of his praise for negotiators: Kaine has established himself as a straight shooter, including by criticizing the administration on foreign policy matters when he doesn’t agree.

He’s been critical of the administration for not approaching Congress to seek authorization for its campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria and he was an original co-sponsor of the measure demanding that Congress get to review the deal.

Kaine’s vocal and confident coming out for the deal marked an early turning point in the administration’s fight to secure veto-proof support in Congress. His pro-deal arguments have since captured the attention of his colleagues, a sure sign of rising influence.

Chris Murphy (D-Conn.): The Connecticut senator was an early deal supporter. Even before he officially announced his backing, Murphy was running interference for the administration. He gave speeches on the merits of peace and diplomacy, and laid out reasons for lawmakers’ support, at hearings with administration officials where most lawmakers took aim at the deal’s weaker points.

But the first-term lawmaker may get the most mileage for his work as part of Dick Durbin’s whip team. He appears to have helped convince at least one senator, Gary Peters (D-Mich.), whose last-minute support was a surprise to some of even the most engaged lobbyists working for the deal.

Murphy has since been outspoken on other foreign policy matters and is someone to watch on such debates in the future.