Progressives and other critics of military engagement against
Iran
scored a surprise victory
last week
when President
Donald Trump
declared upcoming talks with Tehran.
Talks took place
over the weekend in
Oman
As US negotiators work under President Trump’s guidance to establish a fresh agreement designed to limit Iran’s nuclear capabilities, a second round of talks has been scheduled for this coming Saturday in Rome. This indicates that the discussions have thus far progressed without major issues; however, two key figures—US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi—have released brief yet contradictory comments via social media platforms.
“Iran needs to halt and dismantle its nuclear enrichment and weapons development programs,” Witkoff posted on Twitter. In response, Araghchi stated that completely removing all enrichment abilities was not up for discussion. However, indications of a potential accord emerging were evident.
Next, on Wednesday, a fresh explosion occurred from
The New York Times
Trump personally dismissed the idea of U.S. backing for an Israeli-proposed plan to attack Iranian nuclear sites as early as next month.
“I believe Iran has the potential to become a wonderful nation and enjoy a happy life free from mortality,” stated Trump during an address to journalists at the White House on Thursday.
This shift in posture is not going over well in the hawkish corners of Washington’s foreign policy sphere.
“Any agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran should not only ensure the elimination of all aspects of its nuclear program, but must also dismantle its ballistic missile capabilities and halt its sponsorship of terrorist proxy groups globally. Settling for anything short of this would merely be a repeat of what we saw under President Obama,” cautioned the ex-Secretary of State.
Mike Pompeo
One of the newcomers who didn’t get asked back to join the Cabinet this time around.
Senator
Lindsey Graham
One of the Hill’s most vocal critics of Iran emphasized that any agreement must encompass the complete disassembly of Iran’s nuclear facilities and should involve oversight from both the United States and international monitors.
“I fear anything less could be a catastrophic mistake,” he tweeted.
As discussions among the neoconservative wing of the GOP on
Capitol Hill
veered in support of direct strikes on Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile facilities earlier this year,
Donald Trump
declared the restart of his initial term’s “maximum pressure” initiative in February. This approach includes substantial enhancements to both enforcing and implementing anti-Iran sanctions, along with additional actions intended to reduce the nation’s oil exports.
However, the warning signs were clear even during the winter transition period when Trump reshuffled his team. He removed several proponents of his maximalist approach and proceeded to penalize those he considered disloyal—John Bolton, who has been targeted in alleged Iranian hit plots, had his security clearance revoked. Additionally, individuals from his initial term weren’t asked to return as he intensified his push to fill government roles with staunch Make America Great Again supporters.
It now appears evident that Trump is pursuing his maximum pressure approach in a way quite akin to how he enforces what he calls his “reciprocity” policy.
tariffs
On dozens of U.S. trading partners — as leverage.
These same hawks, who are now disconnected from Trump’s circle, have turned to urging the president publicly to adhere to specific redlines. Some of these demands, such as Iran ceasing all its civil nuclear activities and uranium enrichment, may be too stringent for Iranian negotiators to accept.
After just one round of negotiations, it’s too early to predict how things will conclude. However, the faction within MAGA Republicanism that opposes foreign entanglements and “perpetual warfare” is rejoicing over the steps the president has taken to distance himself from the neoconservative influence in his foreign policy circle.
“The Trump administration is essentially George W. Bush’s third term, whether you agree with that assessment or not, and that sums up his entire legacy,” wrote Curt Mills, who serves as the executive director.
The American Conservative
magazine.
“So far, POTUS is sagely waving off this nonsense. But the stakes are that high.”
They’re also railing against the devastation that a war with a Russian-backed Middle Eastern power could wrought.
“How many [wealthy kids] are on the front line? How many of their kids are in that carrier battle group?”
Steve Bannon
asked, referring to American aristocrats.
“He warned that your sons and daughters will be part of those carrier battle groups. They will also be in the first wave,” he cautioned.
War Room
The podcast scheduled for Thursday includes the statement: “Your children may end up conducting the bombing missions if it comes to that.”
Whether it’s from breaking news to political updates, journeying through travel articles to sports highlights, exploring cultural shifts to discussions about climate change—the Independent offers an array of free newsletters tailored to your preferences. To ensure you receive the tales you wish to follow directly into your mailbox, simply click.
here
.
