Capitol Hill demands answers on Trump-Iran deal

Capitol Hill – Republicans and Democrats returned to Washington seeking details on President Donald Trump’s agreement with Iran aimed at ending the war, reopening the Strait of Hormuz, and lifting a U.S. naval blockade. Senators pressed the White House for specifics on nucle

By the time senators trickled back into Washington on Monday, the uncertainty was already sitting in their laps.

President Donald Trump announced an agreement with Iran on Sunday aimed at ending the war in Iran and setting up a ceremonial signing Friday in Geneva. But on Capitol Hill, lawmakers said they still have too many unanswered questions to move quickly—or comfortably—toward approval.

The framework centers on reopening the Strait of Hormuz and lifting the United States’ naval blockade in the region. paired with financial incentives for Iran if Tehran meets certain benchmarks. Yet returning Republicans and Democrats said the details are incomplete, and that they want thorough briefings before anything is finalized.

“I just don’t know enough about it,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters in the Capitol. “Even the people who follow this stuff closely up here don’t know that much about it.”

Thune said he had not been personally briefed. “Congressional leaders and intelligence committees generally receive higher-level intelligence briefings before rank-and-file members. ” the statement of practice is part of how Washington typically handles major disclosures—but Thune said he still lacked the information he needs.

“I think that my understanding of what it entails — and, again, not having seen anything — it would require, I think the issues are going to be compliance, and how are you going to enforce that,” he said.

That focus on enforcement and access to verifiable information was echoed by other GOP senators.

“If it’s a secret deal then how can I take it seriously?” asked Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

Vice President JD Vance told ABC News on Monday that the White House would release the text this week and that “what everybody will see is that Iran doesn’t get a dime of money unless they perform their obligations.”

Even with that promise, senators said crucial pieces remain missing.

Trump has not yet explained how the agreement addresses Iran’s nuclear program, including who would be in charge of verifying Iranian compliance and who would destroy or remove highly enriched uranium believed to be buried under nuclear sites that were badly damaged by U.S. strikes last summer.

A memorandum of understanding also includes the possibility of releasing Iran’s frozen funds, sanctions relief, and a $300 billion fund to help rebuild Iran if Tehran meets certain benchmarks, senior U.S. officials told reporters Monday. But lawmakers said they have not seen the document.

Thune said he wants to know more about the conditions attached to the financial incentives. He said the deal would be a “good one” only if the incentives are conditioned upon Iran winding down its nuclear program and getting rid of the enriched uranium—“preventing them from having a nuclear capability in the future.”.

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said he is hopeful but that assessment is impossible without the final text. “Until you see the final document, it’s hard to make an assessment.”

“I go into it very skeptical of the government of Iran,” Kennedy said. “They learn to lie before they learn to talk. So any agreement we make with them has to have guardrails. It has to have a way to judge through independent inspection if they’re doing what they say they’re doing.”

The lawmakers’ skepticism also collided with the mechanics of how the Senate reviews Iran-related nuclear arrangements.

Under the Iran nuclear agreement review act passed by Congress during the Obama era, any deal the U.S. reaches concerning Iran’s nuclear material must be submitted within a certain amount of time to Congress for review. But the law leaves a decision point for Congress—whether it happens at all is not required.

President Barack Obama’s 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran, known as the JCPOA, was submitted for a vote of disapproval in the Senate. The outcome did not roll back the agreement, but it put senators on record with their support or opposition.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a close ally of Trump and a longtime hawk on Iran, said he is “pulling for a deal” but that Congress will need to review and vote on it, and he wants to see the memorandum the two countries have agreed on.

“The way Iran describes it, it’s awful. The way we describe it, it makes sense to me,” Graham said. “Let’s look at it and see what it actually is.”

Graham has said he wants Vance, whom he called “the architect of the deal,” to present it to lawmakers.

Vance responded to Graham on Monday, saying in an interview with ABC that he would “caution Lindsey Graham and anybody else not to believe the hard-liner propaganda in Iran, but to believe what’s actually in the agreement.”

Separately. Vance told CNN that even though Iran’s new supreme leader. Mojtaba Khamenei. is the son of the last supreme leader—and Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard still has significant authority in Iran—the situation is different. Vance said “fundamentally. it is a much different group of people.” He insisted that the conflict had unlocked more direct communication with high-level Iranian officials and that the relationship was “fundamentally transformed.”.

But in the Senate, the next steps remain uncertain. Most Republicans said they want to review the deal, but it was unclear whether they would have a vote, or whether Congress could pass it.

Republican Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri said he doesn’t think an up-or-down vote is necessary.

“You have the camp that wants us to lose and then you have the camp that wants a forever war,” Schmitt said. “President Trump’s not in either one of those camps, and neither am I.”

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said he expects the Senate will get the final say. He praised Trump for what he described as decisively confronting Iran.

“I think he made America safer,” Cruz said. “The president as commander in chief acted decisively to stop that ayatollah from getting nuclear weapons.”

Sen. James Lankford, an Oklahoma Republican who serves on the Intelligence Committee, said he expects there are still many more steps before any package comes to Congress for review.

“Seems like early reports are showing that this is kind of the first step,” he said. “Once we have a final agreement, we need to take it up and pass it. … If you want a long-term agreement it’s got to be law.”

Democrats pressed a different set of questions, focusing on what changed and what has to be proven.

Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, questioned how the deal improves upon the U.S. position before the war and how it differs from Obama’s 2015 nuclear deal.

“For all his critique of JCPOA, we had international observers, we actually had an alliance there that included the Europeans, and Russia and China were all signatories,” Warner told CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said there are more questions than answers, including what happens to the Iranian nuclear program and sanctions on Iranian oil.

Trump has spent “tens of billions of dollars” and service members and Iranians have died, Warren said, yet “he still cannot explain how one family in Massachusetts is better off.”

Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia said ending a war that he called costly and unpopular would be a good resolution, but he wants details.

“An off ramp is good because it was a war that should have never been started,” Kaine said.

For lawmakers, the common thread Monday was straightforward: they want the document, they want the verification system, and they want clarity on the promises—before the signing date in Geneva comes and goes.

Trump Iran deal Capitol Hill John Thune Thom Tillis JD Vance Senate Geneva signing Strait of Hormuz naval blockade Iran nuclear program compliance verification frozen funds sanctions relief $300 billion fund Lindsey Graham Mark Warner Elizabeth Warren Tim Kaine