In the 46-year history of Iran’s theocratic government, American political leaders in both parties stood by sanctions and condemnation of the country’s sponsorship of terrorism, repression of dissent, and nuclear ambitions, even when the door was open to negotiations. In the dozen days after Israeli warplanes struck Iranian military targets, with American stealth bombers delivering the much-sought coup de grâce with 30,000-pound bunker-busters on the Fordow nuclear enrichment site, the outcome remains uncertain domestically and abroad.
“The Trump administration should not make the same mistake it made this weekend by launching strikes without giving any details to Congress,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wrote. “The law requires the Trump administration to consult with Congress. The Constitution demands it. And the American people – especially the families in harm’s way – deserve nothing less.”
Schumer’s argument rests on President Trump’s decision to launch the strike with little more than a perfunctory last-minute heads-up to lawmakers, and a refusal to ask Congress for an authorization to use force. His tweet made no mention of Iran and its missile attacks on Israel.
His colleague, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the party’s leader in the House of Representatives, issued a similar statement, noting that the strike betrayed Trump’s campaign promise to deliver peace to the Middle East, “misled the country about his intentions,” and failed to seek congressional authorization.
“Donald Trump shoulders complete and total responsibility for any adverse consequences that flow from his unilateral military action,” Jeffries concluded.
But what if the consequences of the Iran strike result in positive change for the Middle East, following earlier examples of Trump policies that allowed Israel to blast away at Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, and remnants of the Assad regime in Syria?
Although on paper Saudi Arabia condemned Israel for bombing Iran, its airspace remains open to Israeli flights. Egypt remains supportive of Palestinian sovereignty, but when Western activists tried to enter Gaza from the Sinai Peninsula, they were stopped by Egyptian authorities and sent back to Europe. In Lebanon, a Hezbollah spokesman confirmed to Newsweek that the Iran-backed organization will not be participating in retaliating against Israel, having signed a ceasefire last November after losing most of its leaders and weapons in a war against Israel.
“Iran is a strong country capable of defending itself; logic dictates that it can confront America and Israel,” the spokesman said. “Hezbollah remains committed to all matters agreed upon since the ceasefire.”
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa was silent on the strikes against Iran, having toppled a pro-Iranian regime as his country struggles to ease sanctions and reconnect with Western nations.
Russia expressed support for Iran, but it is in no position to supply weapons while facing a war of attrition on the Ukrainian front. Instead, the bombing of Iran could result in fewer Shahed drones being sent to the Russians, giving Ukraine an upper hand in a war that is increasingly defined by these devices.
China condemned the June 12 strike as a “violation of Iran’s sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity,” but the statement then urged a peaceful resolution to the conflict. China’s priority concerning Iran is shared with the United States: keeping the Strait of Hormuz open to oil tankers. With few trading partners among the nations, Iran’s threat to close the waterway to the lucrative Chinese market was not carried out.
Recognizing that the Middle East has a history of wars that take decades to resolve, Trump declared a ceasefire for Israel and Iran, slamming both countries for shooting at each other after issuing a deadline.
“In all fairness, Israel unloaded a lot, and now I hear Israel just went out because they felt it was violated by one rocket that didn’t land anywhere. That’s not what we want,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday. He later spoke more harshly about Israel and confirmed that he opposes regime change in Iran as it “takes chaos, and ideally we don’t want to see so much chaos.”
Reza Pahlavi, the exiled heir to the Iranian throne, described the war as “our Berlin Wall moment,” urging his compatriots to overthrow the government without outside assistance, now that its military and political leadership has been diminished. He has made such calls many times since the 1979 revolution, and perhaps this time it is also in vain. As Hamas supporters often say, an idea cannot be defeated – certainly not one inspired by religion. Nevertheless, even as Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his allies believe in death to America and Israel, they do not have the means to carry it out.
Iran has been weakened to a level at which it cannot afford to wage wars, which brings us back to the Democratic leaders in Washington. Will they have the courage to recognize the positive outcome of the strike on Iran, or continue to dwell on the potential harm that did not materialize?
On the local level, some of their colleagues provided a measured statement balancing the necessity of the strike against Trump’s decision to do it unilaterally.
“A nuclear Iran threatens the security and stability of the US, Israel, and our allies,” Rep. Grace Meng wrote. “As the number one state sponsor of terror, we have always known that Iran, if given the ability, would not hesitate to use it against America, Israel, and others.”
She added that the focus should be on “limiting Iran’s retaliation abroad and at home to prevent further escalation,” and concluded that only Congress can declare war and its members must be briefed by the administration. This point is notably disproved by recent examples – most notably President Barack Obama, who ordered the mission that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011, relying on the post-9/11 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists.
Reps. Laura Gillen and Tom Suozzi issued similar statements noting Iran as a sponsor of terror while requesting congressional approval for military force. Having the majority in both houses of Congress, Trump would likely have received approval for military action against Iran, despite a couple of loud isolationists in his party. Perhaps he did not wish to see divisions within his party brought to the floor.
Trump’s quick and very limited strike on Iran, followed by calling for a ceasefire, shows that he has not betrayed his election promise of avoiding “forever wars,” while staying true to “peace through strength” that puts “America First.”
Tweets and soundbites that translate into results.
By Sergey Kadinsky