Williams: Why I will oppose the Iran deal

In 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain led a multination effort to allow Adolf Hitler to seize a part of Czechoslovakia. The Munich Agreement, as it was called, was signed to avoid what the prime minister believed was the only alternative: war.

The following day, Chamberlain applauded the deal in a speech ironically titled "Peace for Our Time." He promised a renewed friendship between Germany and Britain — "a desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again."

One year later, Germany invaded Poland. World War II claimed the lives of nearly a half-million British civilians and military personnel. In hindsight, Chamberlain fed an insatiable beast. He capitulated.

No one is capable of predicting the future; but I believe history and patterns of behavior are our most reliable guides.

This week, Congress will vote on a previously agreed to multi-nation deal with Iran.

First and foremost, any deal with Iran — a nation that the United States cut off diplomatic ties with 35 years ago — must protect America's interests at home and abroad. This deal does not.

While the Obama administration claims the Iran deal is the best way to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, the agreement relies too heavily on trust.

The terms of the deal allow Iran to use its own inspectors. As the former Democratic Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said, the agreement is "the equivalent of having an athlete accused of using performance-enhancing drugs submit an unsupervised urine sample."

Iran's historical patterns of bad behavior demonstrate why self-inspection is a problem.

Iran has previously violated the terms of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and has denied the International Atomic Energy Agency access to documents, individuals and locations relevant to its military and enrichment activities.

Despite previous claims by White House officials, the deal does not authorize "anytime, anywhere" inspections. According to the agreement, Iran must be given advance notice before inspections are conducted.

Rather than preventing Iran from getting the bomb, this deal kicks the can down the road for future world leaders to deal with.

In 15 years, restrictions on Iran's uranium enrichment activities will be lifted, putting Iran on a smoother path to a nuclear weapon. In 10 years, the United Nation's ability to reimpose sanctions will expire.

The Iran deal was brokered with a supreme leader who shouts "Death to America" and calls the United States the "Great Satan." Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has vowed to wipe Israel off the map, said this week that Israel would not exist in 25 years. In my opinion, that statement alone is enough to give us pause.

As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned in his address to Congress earlier this year, "Iran's regime poses a grave threat, not only to Israel, but also to the peace of the entire world." I agree with his assessment.

While I personally believe the United States has a moral obligation to defend Israel, I also believe the U.S. has a strategic obligation to protect its greatest friend in the Middle East. The benefits of a secure, stable and trustworthy ally in a very volatile and tumultuous region are obvious.

Despite warnings from those within President Barack Obama's own party and leaders of ally nations, I am afraid this president is more concerned with leaving a lasting legacy than guaranteeing the safety of America, Israel and the world.

This Iran deal, I believe, is Obama's Chamberlain moment. Right now, Obama, like the former British prime minister, is leading the charge in surrendering to a dictator in a policy of appeasement.

I will vote to oppose this deal — and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Williams, a Republican from Austin, serves on the Financial Services Committee, an Iran deal committee of jurisdiction in the U.S. House of Representatives.