WASHINGTON — When Congress returned to work Monday, Republican senators made clear they want a lot more information about the deal President Donald Trump announced with Iran — and some are openly doubtful about it.
The agreement, announced Sunday, is aimed at ending the war with Iran and is scheduled for a formal signing ceremony this Friday in Geneva. The deal centers on reopening the Strait of Hormuz, lifting a U.S. naval blockade in the region, and offering Iran financial rewards if it meets specific conditions. But senators from both parties say too many questions remain unanswered before the agreement is finalized.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., admitted he simply doesn’t have enough information yet. “I just don’t know enough about it,” he told reporters at the Capitol. “Even the people who follow this stuff closely up here don’t know that much about it.”
Thune also noted that despite congressional leaders typically receiving early intelligence briefings on major developments, he had not personally been briefed on the deal. He said his biggest concerns center on how compliance will be verified and enforced.
“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,” Thune said.
Other Republican senators voiced similar doubts. Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina put it bluntly: “If it’s a secret deal then how can I take it seriously?”
Vice President JD Vance pushed back on the criticism during an appearance on ABC News Monday, saying the White House plans to release the full text of the agreement this week. He added that “what everybody will see is that Iran doesn’t get a dime of money unless they perform their obligations.”
One major unresolved issue is how the deal handles Iran’s nuclear program — specifically, who will verify Iran’s compliance and who will be responsible for destroying or removing highly enriched uranium believed to be stored at nuclear sites that were heavily damaged by U.S. military strikes last summer.
According to senior U.S. officials, a memorandum of understanding tied to the agreement includes the potential release of Iran’s frozen assets, sanctions relief, and a $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran — but only if Tehran meets certain benchmarks. That document has not yet been made public.
Thune said the deal could be a good one if the financial incentives are truly tied to Iran dismantling its nuclear program and eliminating its enriched uranium stockpile, “preventing them from having a nuclear capability in the future.”
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said he remains hopeful but cautious. “Until you see the final document, it’s hard to make an assessment,” he said. “I go into it very skeptical of the government of Iran. 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.”
Under a law passed by Congress during the Obama administration, any U.S. agreement involving Iran’s nuclear materials must be submitted to Congress for review within a set timeframe — though it is ultimately up to Congress whether to act on it.
For comparison, President Barack Obama’s 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran, known as the JCPOA, was submitted to the Senate for a vote of disapproval. While the outcome didn’t overturn the deal, it put senators on record regarding their support or opposition.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, a close Trump ally who has long taken a tough stance on Iran, said he is “pulling for a deal” but believes Congress must review and vote on it. He wants to see the memorandum both countries have agreed to.
“The way Iran describes it, it’s awful. The way we describe it, it makes sense to me,” Graham, R-S.C., said. “Let’s look at it and see what it actually is.”
Graham has called on Vice President Vance, whom he described as “the architect of the deal,” to present it directly to lawmakers. Vance responded Monday, urging Graham and others to disregard what he called “hard-liner propaganda in Iran” and instead focus on what the agreement actually contains.
In a separate interview with CNN, Vance addressed concerns about Iran’s leadership, arguing that even though the country’s new supreme leader is the son of the previous one and the Revolutionary Guard still holds considerable power, the conflict has opened up much more direct communication with senior Iranian officials. He said the relationship has been “fundamentally transformed.”
While most Senate Republicans said they want to review the deal, it remains unclear whether Congress will hold a vote or whether such a vote could pass.
Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., said he doesn’t believe an up-or-down vote is necessary. “You have the camp that wants us to lose and then you have a camp that wants a forever war,” he said. “President Trump’s not in either one of those camps, and neither am I.”
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, predicted the Senate will ultimately weigh in. He praised Trump for what he called “the single most consequential decision of his presidency” in choosing to strike Iran, adding: “I think he made America safer. The president as commander in chief acted decisively to stop that ayatollah from getting nuclear weapons.”
Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., a member of the Intelligence Committee, said he believes there are still many steps ahead before anything reaches Congress. “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 were equally full of questions, particularly about how the new deal improves on the situation before the war began and how it compares to Obama’s 2015 nuclear agreement.
Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, pointed out on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday that the JCPOA included international observers, European allies, and signatures from Russia and China. “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,” he said.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said there are far more questions than answers — including what becomes of Iran’s nuclear program and sanctions on Iranian oil. She said Trump has spent “tens of billions of dollars,” lives have been lost on both sides, “and he still cannot explain how one family in Massachusetts is better off.”
Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said ending a costly and unpopular war would be a welcome outcome, but he wants more specifics. “An off ramp is good because it was a war that should have never been started,” he said.
