JAKARTA — The Iran deal being brokered by Donald Trump is already under attack from both Democrats and Republicans in the United States, after the president renewed threats of military strikes if Tehran fails to restrain its proxy groups in Lebanon.
The political backlash landed just as direct U.S.-Iran talks in Lucerne, Switzerland, entered their opening round. The stakes are not small. Energy markets, shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf, and Washington’s diplomatic room to maneuver are all being pulled into a fresh round of tension.
Bipartisan criticism of the Iran deal
Republican Senator John Cornyn said the deal was too loose and risked giving Iran’s military capabilities a new lease on life. He argued that economic pressure on the regime, which he sees as deeply problematic, has not yet forced a change in behavior.
“That money will be used to replace ballistic missile assets and start enriching uranium again,” Cornyn said, according to a statement cited by U.S. media. A similar tone came from the Democratic side.
Susan Rice, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and national security adviser under Barack Obama, called the memorandum of understanding, or MOU, signed by Trump in Paris last week “fragile” and “striking.” In an interview with ABC News This Week, Rice said too many concessions were made up front before a full nuclear agreement was in place.
Rice also pointed to one key issue: Iran is said to already be able to sell its oil and petroleum products without hurdles, then use the revenue to rebuild its power. She said that approach is very different from Obama’s, when access to frozen Iranian assets was restricted and could only be used for humanitarian purposes.
That is the point of friction in Washington. Too early. Too loose.
Trump threatens again, Vance talks progress
As criticism grew, Trump added more pressure. On Truth Social, he demanded that Iran immediately stop its “high-paid proxies” in Lebanon from causing trouble. If not, Trump threatened to strike Iran “very hard again,” as he did last week.
Iranian media outlet IRNA reported that the Iranian delegation briefly left the building where negotiations were being held after meeting the Qatari delegation serving as mediator. IRNA also said Trump posted another threat as the talks began in Switzerland.
Vice President JD Vance took a much more upbeat tone. He said negotiators had “made major progress in just the last few hours” and expected additional movement soon. Even so, he acknowledged that the situation in Lebanon remains complicated.
“Things like this are always a bit messy,” Vance told reporters. He added that the Trump administration still had “additional wood to chop,” a phrase suggesting there is still heavy work left to do.
Hormuz Strait and Hezbollah are part of the gamble
What makes the dispute more serious is Trump’s warning that touches the Strait of Hormuz. The narrow waterway is a lifeline for global oil shipments. If Washington really tries to seize control or force changes there, the effects could spread quickly through global energy prices.
That is why Energy Secretary Chris Wright’s comments also drew attention. In an interview with ABC’s This Week, Wright said the Lucerne talks would reveal what Iran wants and what compromise it is prepared to make. He said Tehran’s leverage is much weaker after U.S. military pressure and diplomacy worked side by side.
“We’ve never been in a situation like this before,” Wright said. According to him, U.S. military action has changed Iran’s calculations at the negotiating table.
But criticism inside the U.S. has not eased. Democratic Senator Cory Booker refused to give Trump credit for ending the war. He compared the situation to “an arsonist who sets the fire and then gets praised for running out of the burning building.” Booker said the U.S. government had in effect “surrendered” to its enemy.
Even the New York Post, a tabloid that has generally supported Trump, ran a sharp headline saying the Iran deal is worse than Obama’s agreement. That kind of tone rarely appears from both political camps at once. And that matters.
For readers outside the United States, the fight still matters. Oil prices, international shipping, and the risk of wider conflict in the Middle East can ripple into the global economy, including countries that import energy such as Indonesia. If the conflict spreads, fuel imports and logistics costs could feel the pressure.
Trump is now operating on two fronts at once: the negotiating table and the stage of threats. The problem is simple. The two approaches may not reinforce each other.
As Rice put it, a good deal should not hand out major gains up front before the final terms are truly locked in. “Such concessions should not have been given first,” she said.
📝 Leave a Comment
Comment as . Reviewed by an admin before it appears.