As reports emerge of advanced talks toward a possible U.S.-Iran agreement, senior Republicans and figures close to President Trump issued sharp warnings Saturday night. Senator Roger Wicker, Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, criticized the possibility of a 60-day ceasefire, arguing that “everything achieved in Operation Epic Fury will be for nothing.” He called it “a moment that will define President Trump’s legacy.”
Fox News host and Trump supporter Mark Levin weighed in on the reports, writing that “history teaches us that peace deals are best made after the enemy is defeated or surrendered.” Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, made a similar point, arguing that while the U.S. and Israel won on the battlefield, the reported ceasefire terms effectively hand an advantage to the Iranian regime. “Another 60-day extension will only deepen Tehran’s advantage,” he said.
The sharp criticism also came from within the administration itself. Leo Terrell, serving as an adviser in the Trump administration, issued a public appeal to the president: “Mr. President, Iran cannot be trusted.” Meanwhile, Senator Lindsey Graham warned that if a deal is signed based on the assumption that the Strait of Hormuz cannot be defended against Iranian terror, Iran will be perceived as a regional power capable of imposing diplomatic solutions through military threats.
Graham added that a situation where Iran is seen as having a permanent ability to threaten the Strait of Hormuz and strike oil infrastructure in the Gulf would be “a nightmare for Israel” and a significant strategic shift in the Middle East. If that’s the starting point for an agreement, he said, “the question arises why the war even started.” It appears that in the American conservative camp, there’s a growing sense that any deal allowing Iran to preserve significant strategic capabilities could turn recent months’ military achievements into a temporary gain at best.