Concessions to Iran split Republicans: "Trump gave in"

In the folds of the difficult negotiations between the United States and Iraninsert the Republican discontent of the American Congress towards the president Donald Trump. Some party leaders have accused the tycoon of having gave in too much to the requests of Teheran. Foreign policy hawks, including senators Lindsey Graham e Ted Cruzspoke out negatively after reports emerged over the weekend that US negotiators were close to an agreement that would secure concessions to Iran and postponed the solution on dismantling of Iran’s nuclear programalso granting it unlocking assets for 12 billion dollars as a precondition for subsequent negotiations.

Efforts to find one diplomatic solution to the conflict and bring them out United States from a complicated situation have intensified in the last week, but with a political choreography that appeared consolidated: one step back, half a step forward, the triumphalistic announcement of a “imminent agreement” followed by braking, and then repeating the word like a mantra “progress”. At the moment the negotiations are following this pace.

From optimism to pessimism

All’optimism on Saturday took over pessimism on Sunday. Today the Secretary of State Marco Rubio he said that “news is coming soon”, but it is the same one who yesterday had first announced the turning point during the day, which did not happen, and then admitted that “finding a nuclear deal in 72 hours is not possible”.

The doubts of the Republicans

Meanwhile i Republicans have publicly expressed their doubts. “If it is perceived in the region that an agreement with Iran allows the regime to survive and become more powerful over time, we will have added fuel to the fire of conflicts in Lebanon e Iraq”, the senator wrote on social media Grahamthe president’s loyal ally and frequent golfing partner.

“Personally – he added – I am sceptical on the idea thatIran the ability to threaten him cannot be denied Strict and that the region cannot protect itself from Iranian military capability”.

Ted Cruzalso a hawk foreign policysaid he was “deeply concerned” for news of an agreement, defining the choice of Trump to be the first to launch attacks against Iranmost important decision of his second term” “If the result of all this was an Iranian regime, still led by Islamists who shout ‘death to America‘, which he receives now billions of dollarscan enrich uranium and develop nuclear weapons and has effective control over the Strait of Hormuzthen it would be a disastrous mistake,” Cruz added.

Criticism of the ceasefire

Roger WickerRepublican president of the Senate Armed Services Committeehe wrote on X: “The alleged 60-day ceasefirewith the belief that Iran will negotiate in good faith, would be a disaster”.

The clash with Pompeo

He added to the debate Mike PompeoTrump’s secretary of state during his first administration, who called the plan “far from America FirstThe communications director of the White House Steven Cheung responded to him by publishing in which he invited the former Secretary of State to “keep quiet and leave the real work to the professionals.”

Internal tensions within the Republicans

Trump campaign advisor Alex Bruesewitz instead, he accused Cruz of “try to undermine the president and his administration.” The Texas senator responded that “i young political opportunists who are pushing to pacify relations with Iran are not helping the president.”

The doubts of Thom Tillis

Thom TillisRepublican senator from North Carolinaone of the president’s harshest critics, questioned the basis of theagreementtelling the Cnn that the picture shown “it doesn’t make sense“We were told this eleven weeks ago by the Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and from Department of Defense that they had annihilated Iranian defenses and that it was only a matter of time before we had the nuclear material” he said. “Now – he added – are we talking about a position where we could accept that the nuclear material remains in Iran? How can this make sense?”.