Republican hawks – Republican war hawks who backed President Donald Trump’s attacks on Iran are now uneasy after early reports of a secret “memorandum of understanding” that would end hostilities and reopen the Strait of Hormuz—while critics warn the arrangement could amount to
WASHINGTON — The unease among some of President Donald Trump’s most persistent Iran hawks isn’t about whether the Strait of Hormuz should reopen. It’s about what that reopening might cost—and what may be slipping out of reach as the conflict grinds on.
Early reporting on a “memorandum of understanding” between the United States and Iran points to a simple package: hostilities would cease. and Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz. a move officials and lawmakers have linked to easing a global economic crisis that has included spiking fuel prices. But the deal remains secret. and the two sides have offered sharply different accounts of what it actually delivers—especially where money is concerned.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, a longtime cheerleader for striking Iran, put it bluntly: “As described, it sounds promising. What the Iranians say sounds not so good. So, we’ll look at it soon.”
On the economic side. a senior Iranian official told Reuters that Iran would receive $25 billion in assets previously frozen by the U.S. Another source said the agreement could include a $300 billion economic development fund for Iran—an echo of the kind of benefit Trump and Republicans once accused former President Barack Obama of offering Tehran as part of the 2015 nuclear deal that Trump terminated in his first term.
Sen. John Barrasso, another prominent Republican, said the contrast he hears between the present and the past matters. “The difference. though. is that President Trump went in from a position of strength. and when I hear the Democrats comparing this to the [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action]. that was a complete failure.”.
Yet even supporters who remain hopeful have reason to pause over what the deal is really tying together: access to the strait and the future of nuclear bargaining. Sen. Chris Murphy argued the foundation of any agreement could weaken U.S. leverage. “If you have given up all your leverage just to open the strait. you have nothing left to try to get them to come to the table on their nuclear program.”.
A senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Iran would not automatically reap economic benefits from the memorandum itself. In an email. the official laid out conditions: “Iran can only access any benefits of the MOU if they abide by all of the points they agreed to — including no nuclear weapon. neutralizing its enriched material. and not interfering with the free flow of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.”.
The discomfort also sits on top of expectations that followed the early phase of Trump’s war with Iran. For advocates of strikes, the hoped-for outcomes stretched far beyond reopening shipping routes. They had painted a path that could eliminate Iran’s ballistic missile program. end support for proxy groups like Hezbollah. and even lead to regime change and the end of the Islamic Republic.
Instead, the conflict’s most visible impact has been the opposite of what those hopes implied. The war appears to have strengthened Iran’s hand by demonstrating its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz. It has also seemed to reinforce the position of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and other hardliners within the regime.
Trump himself had framed the timeline in March, saying the war would last only four or five weeks. Months later. with gas prices spiking as the strait’s closure disrupted global energy markets. the president appears increasingly eager for a way out—potentially even if it means arriving at an Obama-style nuclear arrangement.
Sen. Joni Ernst, a Republican who is focused on the nuclear endgame, said she wanted details before judgment. “I don’t know a lot about it so far, so I’m reserving judgment. But we. we really need to make sure that it captures what we want to see. which is absolutely no way that they get a nuclear weapon. ” she said.
For Senate Majority Leader John Thune, the gap is even more basic: he says he hasn’t been briefed.
“I’m hoping that when we get the information. more information about the memorandum of understanding. we’ll have a better sense about what the path forward is. ” Thune told reporters. “But I fully believe that the president and his team are moving in the right direction. getting the strait open. getting those shipping lanes opened again.”.
There’s a question running through the unease in Washington: if the goal of the attacks was to change Iran’s behavior, why does the moment of relief—opening the strait—come bundled with competing versions of what Iran receives and how quickly Washington’s leverage might be spent.
United States politics Iran deal Strait of Hormuz Lindsey Graham John Barrasso Chris Murphy Joni Ernst John Thune Donald Trump Iran nuclear negotiations Republican lawmakers
So Iran gets money but we just pretend it’s fine?
This sounds like the usual secret deal stuff. If they reopen the Strait of Hormuz then gas prices should drop right? But “secret” means nobody really knows what we’re giving up.
I don’t even get why they’re “uneasy” if it ends hostilities. Isn’t this what everyone wanted? The part about $25 billion and then somehow a $300 billion fund?? Like which one is it, and who approves that? Sounds kinda like Obama 2.0 but with different letters.
Republican hawks are mad because it might cost too much… but they were hawks over here pounding tables about going in too. Now it’s a memo and everyone’s acting confused. Also the Strait of Hormuz reopening is like the whole reason people panic, so if it reopens and the price of fuel doesn’t change then that deal is useless. I swear half the reporting is just “sources say” and vibes.