'Not remotely America First': Republican hawks attack Trump's emerging Iran deal

A growing bloc of Republican hawks turned on US President Donald Trump's emerging Iran deal over the weekend, warning that the reported terms would be a "disastrous mistake" and a betrayal of the hard line Trump built his foreign policy on, in a rare burst of public criticism aimed at a Republican president from within his own party.

The backlash followed Trump's announcement on Saturday that a peace agreement with Tehran had been "largely negotiated" and would include reopening the Strait of Hormuz. The president offered few details and did not mention Iran's nuclear program, even as reports indicated the deal would involve sanctions relief and an Iranian commitment to give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas led the charge, writing that he was "deeply concerned about what we are hearing about an Iran 'deal' being pushed by some voices in the administration." Cruz warned that if the outcome left an Iranian regime "receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake." He urged Trump to "hold the line, defend America & enforce the red lines he has repeatedly drawn."

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina argued that ending the war along the proposed terms would amount to conceding that there is no military solution to defeating Iran. His post was amplified by the Senate Republicans' official X account and reposted by Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, warned that "the rumored 60-day ceasefire - with the belief that Iran will ever engage in good faith - would be a disaster," adding that "everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught," referring to the war by Washington's name for it. Wicker had earlier in the week urged Trump to ignore advisers pushing for an agreement and to "finish the job he started."

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered some of the sharpest criticism, tying the deal directly to the 2015 nuclear agreement negotiated under former president Barack Obama. The deal "being floated with Iran seems straight out of the Wendy Sherman-Robert Malley-Ben Rhodes playbook: Pay the IRGC to build a WMD program and terrorize the world," Pompeo wrote, naming three officials closely associated with Obama-era Iran diplomacy. 

Calling the reported terms "not remotely America First," Pompeo laid out his own prescription: "Open the damned strait. Deny Iran access to money. Take out enough Iranian capability so it cannot threaten our allies in the region."

Former national security adviser John Bolton went further, dismissing negotiations altogether. It was "a waste of oxygen to negotiate with the Iranians," he told Bloomberg, arguing that the ceasefire had benefited Tehran by allowing it to restart drone production and recover buried weapons caches.

The criticism reflects a broader anxiety among Iran hawks that Trump, who withdrew the United States from the Obama-era nuclear deal in 2018 and long cast himself as Tehran's toughest adversary, is now poised to accept an agreement they view as dangerously similar. 

Not all Republicans share the alarm, with some in Congress expressing support for the administration's approach. The White House has not detailed the deal's final terms, and Iran has made no public statement confirming the framework Trump described.