Follow us on social

google cta
Kerry-zarif

GOP Congressman shocked to think Iran's Zarif would lie about John Kerry

Lawmaker uses climate hearing to question the envoy's honesty about an alleged conversation regarding Israeli airstrikes in Syria.

Middle East
google cta
google cta

Republican members of Congress grilled U.S. climate envoy John Kerry about his alleged interactions with Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif during a Wednesday hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Kerry denied Zarif's claim that they had talked about Israeli activities in Syria, but one Republican member had a hard time believing that Iran’s foreign ministry was not a trustworthy source.

Watch here:

“So Mr. Zarif is a liar?” Scott Perry (R–Pa.) asked.

“Mr. Zarif may be confused or incorrect or he’s trying to embellish,” Kerry responded. “I’ve seen him be quite emotional. I can’t vouch for why he did or what he said. I’m just telling you that didn't happen, end of story.”

The attack on Kerry stems from a recording of a confidential interview between Zarif and an Iranian journalist that was leaked last month.

In the recording, Zarif emphasized that the Iranian military had kept his ministry out of the loop on many issues, and claimed that he only learned about 200 Israeli airstrikes on Iranian positions in Syria from a conversation with Kerry.

Zarif’s claim stretches credulity — the Israeli strikes have been reported on by media and publicly discussed by Israeli officials for years — but hawks have seized on the claims to pressure the Biden administration over its current negotiations to restrain Iran’s nuclear program.

Perry said that there were reasons to be “suspicious” of Kerry’s intentions, citing Kerry’s 1985 trip to Nicaragua and a 2006 trip to Syria. In the process, Perry suggested that the United States should have tried to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria during the Iraq War.

“It’s a sea of war, and horrifying activities in Syria right now,” Perry said. “If we could have done something with Assad then, maybe we wouldn’t be dealing with what we’re dealing with now.”

Reps. Lee Zeldin (R–N.Y.) and Ann Wagner (R–Mo.) also grilled Kerry over his interactions with the Iranian foreign minister. Wagner made a token effort to connect her questions to climate change, which was the subject of the hearing.

“If true, Javad Zarif’s claims raise serious questions about your ability, sir, to unreservedly protect U.S. interests as special presidential envoy for climate,” she said. “An overly-narrow focus on left-wing action items like the deeply flawed Paris [climate] agreement and the Iran nuclear accord cannot blind us to the malign intentions of adversaries like Iran, Russia, and the People’s Republic of China.”

But another member of the committee called the whole exercise absurd.

“I am saddened that some of my colleagues would seemingly put the faith in the word of the Iranian foreign minister over that of yours,” Rep. Dean Phillips (D–Minn.) said. “The irony is not lost on me.”


Climate envoy John Kerry (shutterstock/drop of light) and Iran’s foreign minister Javad Zarif (Gabriel Petrescu / Shutterstock.com)
google cta
Middle East
G7 Summit
Top photo credit: May 21, 2023, Hiroshima, Hiroshima, Japan: (From R to L) Comoros' President Azali Assoumani, World Trade Organization (WTO) Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the G7 summit in Hiroshima, Japan. (Credit Image: © POOL via ZUMA Press Wire)

Middle Powers are setting the table so they won't be 'on the menu'

Asia-Pacific

The global order was already fragmenting before Donald Trump returned to the White House. But the upended “rules” of global economic and foreign policies have now reached a point of no return.

What has changed is not direction, but speed. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s remarks in Davos last month — “Middle powers must act together, because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu” — captured the consequences of not acting quickly. And Carney is not alone in those fears.

keep readingShow less
Vice President JD Vance Azerbaijan Armenia
U.S. Vice President JD Vance gets out of a car before boarding Air Force Two upon departure for Azerbaijan, at Zvartnots International Airport in Yerevan, Armenia, February 10, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/Pool

VP Vance’s timely TRIPP to the South Caucasus

Washington Politics

Vice President JD Vance’s regional tour to Armenia and Azerbaijan this week — the highest level visit by an American official to the South Caucasus since Vice President Joe Biden went to Georgia in 2009 — demonstrates that Washington is not ignoring Yerevan and Baku and is taking an active role in their normalization process.

Vance’s stop in Armenia included an announcement that Yerevan has procured $11 million in U.S. defense systems — a first — in particular Shield AI’s V-BAT, an ISR unmanned aircraft system. It was also announced that the second stage of a groundbreaking AI supercomputer project led by Firebird, a U.S.-based AI cloud and infrastructure company, would commence after having secured American licensing for the sale and delivery of an additional 41,000 NVIDIA GB300 graphics processing units.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Monitors at the United Nations General Assembly hall display the results of a vote on a resolution condemning the annexation of parts of Ukraine by Russia, amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, New York, U.S., October 12, 2022. REUTERS/David 'Dee' Delgado||

We're burying the rules based order. But what's next?

Global Crises

In a Davos speech widely praised for its intellectual rigor and willingness to confront established truths, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney finally laid the fiction of the “rules-based international order” to rest.

The “rules-based order” — or RBIO — was never a neutral description of the post-World War II system of international law and multilateral institutions. Rather, it was a discourse born out of insecurity over the West’s decline and unwillingness to share power. Aimed at preserving the power structures of the past by shaping the norms and standards of the future, the RBIO was invariably something that needed to be “defended” against those who were accused of opposing it, rather than an inclusive system that governed relations between all states.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.