In Washington, the debate over the administration’s push to end the Iran war has spilled beyond Democrats and into parts of the president’s own political coalition, with some Republicans arguing that the emerging terms—still short on details—could undercut the aims of the fighting.
The disagreement centers on what Trump’s representatives are working out to halt the conflict. The outlines described by regional officials would end the war while Iran reopens the Strait of Hormuz and gives up a stockpile of highly enriched uranium, with “details and timelines” to be negotiated during a later 60-day window.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, criticized Trump’s approach as he sought to defend the decision to use military force early in the war. Cruz said Trump’s decision to strike Iran was the “most consequential” action of his second term and argued the outcome of that effort should not be allowed to “be an Iranian regime” that retains the capability to enrich uranium, develop nuclear weapons, and hold sway over the strait. In a Saturday post on X reacting to Trump’s updates after Trump spoke with Israeli and other U.S. allies’ leaders, Cruz wrote that such a result would be a “disastrous mistake.”
Other Republicans who are close to Trump raised separate concerns about how any pause in fighting might affect Iran’s leverage in the region. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., panned a deal that would leave Iran “perceived” as a dominant force and would keep Tehran’s ability to destroy oil infrastructure in the Gulf, while Sen. Roger Wicker questioned a proposed 60-day ceasefire, calling it a “disaster” and warning that “Everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!”
Trump, for his part, disputed the criticism and said his team’s work was not finished. The president dismissed objections to a deal he described as not “even fully negotiated yet,” and he said he would keep U.S. military pressure in place—adding that a blockade of Iranian ports would remain “in full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed.” Trump also contrasted the emerging approach with the nuclear deal Iran reached during the Obama administration, saying his proposal is “THE EXACT OPPOSITE” of what he described as the earlier pact.
Some Republicans on Capitol Hill urged giving the administration room to negotiate while the terms develop. Sen. Rand Paul, of Kentucky, defended Trump’s peace negotiations in a post on X, writing that “War virtually always ends with negotiations” and arguing critics should “give President Trump the space to find an American First solution.” Other former national security officials and hard-line conservatives voiced skepticism that the administration’s emerging outline is meaningfully different from what Trump rejected before.
Former secretary of state Mike Pompeo, for example, said Saturday that the proposed deal appeared to him to be the same as the Obama-era one that Trump withdrew from, writing on X that it was “Not remotely America First.” John Bolton, a former national security adviser, said Sunday that reports about the emerging agreement suggested it would favor Iran, writing that if the reporting was correct, the ayatollahs would have won “a significant victory,” with Iran “back on the road to nuclear weapons” and continuing support for “global terrorism.”
While critics argued that the administration’s goals were at risk, Rubio said Trump has already proven his approach toward Iran and said a nuclear-capable Iran would not happen. During a diplomatic trip in India, Rubio told reporters at a news conference that “no president has been stronger against Iran than Trump,” adding that Trump’s commitment that Iran “they’ll never have a nuclear weapon” should not be questioned. Rubio also said the notion that Trump would accept a deal that puts Iran in a stronger position on nuclear ambitions is “absurd” and “That’s just not going to happen.”
As the debate continues, lawmakers also weighed the timing and terms of the proposed ceasefire against the war’s toll. The war began when the United States and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, and polls show it has been unpopular with the American public, while critics have cited the cost to U.S. taxpayers and deaths of service members during the operation. The standoff has also included Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a move that has jolted the world economy and contributed to higher gasoline and other prices, according to the AP reporting.
Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, a Trump antagonist, also sought to calibrate criticism to what he said remains unknown. He told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that while the terms are not fully known, he thought the emerging direction looked credible if it was strong enough for lawmakers who have been highly critical of the administration—adding that “if Lindsey Graham and Ted Cuz are crashing out last night, I’d say it’s probably a pretty good deal.” Massie is set to leave Congress in January after what the AP described as losing his GOP primary last week to a Trump-backed challenger.