Michigan Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed pushed back against conventional foreign policy questioning during an interview released on Monday, describing demands for binary condemnations of foreign governments as an “odd approach” to international diplomacy.
Speaking with ABC News host Linsey Davis, El-Sayed addressed whether he would explicitly condemn Iran’s current regime. He argued that focusing strictly on whether to issue a condemnation is secondary to pursuing diplomatic pathways toward peace.
“This idea of like, condemn or not condemn is kind of an odd approach,” El-Sayed said during the broadcast. He noted that while he has condemned specific actions by various nations, international relations require engaging with actors and figuring out how to make peace with people holding different views.
El-Sayed acknowledged that the Iranian regime has engaged in horrific acts and acts against democracy, stating that such behavior is “not an open question.” However, he shifted the focus toward broader strategic questions regarding American national interest, drawing a contrast with the foreign policy approach of the Obama administration.
He praised the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, arguing that it successfully created a space to contain the nuclear threat and placed the United States on a pathway to peace. He criticized the subsequent dismantling of the agreement and argued that current policies have led the nation into an active conflict without clear war aims.
When pressed further by Davis on whether he would provide a direct yes-or-no condemnation of the current Iranian government, El-Sayed reiterated that he condemns specific actions rather than participating in blanket political phrasing. He compared the line of questioning to how other foreign governments are treated in public discourse.
“I condemn a lot of their action. But if you want a pathway to peace with folks, you’re going to have to figure out how to get to a position of peace,” El-Sayed said. He also pointed to human rights abuses by other nations, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, arguing that foreign policy should consistently promote democratic values while pursuing diplomatic solutions rather than relying on standard political vetting questions.
