Follow us on social

google cta
2020-09-23t155218z_20709791_rc2f4j9ad172_rtrmadp_3_health-coronavirus-usa-hearing-scaled

Sen. Rand Paul bucks party, says getting out of Iran deal was 'a mistake'

The Kentucky Republican leaves classified briefing, says US in "much more difficult position now" than when the JCPOA was enforced.

Analysis | Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

While the rest of his party remains in firm opposition to it, Republican Senator Rand Paul appears to be in favor of a return to the Iran nuclear deal. He said as much on Tuesday, charging that America’s exit from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was a “mistake” made by former President Donald Trump. 

The Senator made the statements in an interview with POLITICO’s Andrew Desiderio after a classified briefing on Capitol Hill, adding that “by all accounts, we’re in a much more difficult position now than when we had” an intact JCPOA. 

Trump withdrew the United States from the nuclear agreement in 2018 and placed a “maximum pressure” sanctions regime on Iran. He believed the economic war would force Iran to the table and he could negotiate a tougher agreement. At the time, the UN nuclear watchdog had confirmed Iran was in full compliance with the JCPOA.

Tehran has made several advancements in its nuclear program, since. However, the progress has remained in the civilian sector. There is no indication Iran is looking to make nuclear weapons. The Iranian government has withstood a lot of the economic pressure, in part, by increasing ties with Venezuela and China. 

The Biden administration has been in negotiations with Iran — and the other parties to the JCPOA, including Russia, China, UK, Germany, France and the EU  — in Vienna for several months with many expecting that there will be an agreement announced in the very near future. 

But one hurdle to a potential return to the agreement is Congressional opposition. Paul recently broke with his party when he became the only GOP Senator not to sign on to a letter that condemned what they considered a weak deal on the table with Iran. (Many Democrats, including Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Bob Menendez, are also opposed to a successful return to the old agreement). 

The March 14 Republican letter states that the senators want nothing less than a new deal with new restrictions on Iran that go far beyond its nuclear program:

“Republicans have made it clear: We would be willing and eager to support an Iran policy that completely blocks Iran’s path to a nuclear weapons capability, constrains Iran’s ballistic missile program, and confronts Iran’s support for terrorism. But if the administration agrees to a deal that fails to achieve these objectives or makes achieving them more difficult, Republicans will do everything in our power to reverse it.”

Former Vice President Mike Pence, in a recent trip to Israel, told Israeli leaders and the press that any future Republican administration would tear up any deal Biden made in Vienna immediately. The Israel government has been one of the deal’s biggest critics and played a heavy role in convincing Trump to withdraw from it in 2018. Interestingly, former Israeli leaders have come forward in recent months to say they thought getting out of the deal and accompanying maximum pressure campaign against Iran might have been a strategic mistake.

With the even Republican-Democrat divide in Congress, Paul's support could actually be crucial for a return to the nuclear agreement with Iran, and he could even serve as an example to other Republicans who may not be so adamantly against it.


U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) looks on during a U.S. Senate Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Hearing, September 23, 2020. Alex Edelman/Pool via REUTERS
google cta
Analysis | Reporting | Middle East
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?
Top image credit: Sens. Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) sit look on during a congressional hearing in January, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Sipa USA)

Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?

Washington Politics

On Wednesday, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) told CNN that he would support new funding for the U.S. war with Iran — but only if Israel and Arab Gulf states help pay for it.

“We’re using our taxpayer money to protect those countries,” Gallego said. “We’re using our men to protect these countries. They need to throw in and have skin in the game too.”

keep readingShow less
Polymarket Iran War
Top photo credit: Polymarket logo (Shutterstock/PJ McDonald) and Scene following an airstrike on an Iranian police centre damaging residential buildings around it in Niloofar square in central Tehran on march 1, 2026. (Hamid Vakili/Parspix/ABACAPRESS.COM)

Prediction markets are a national security threat

Latest

Hours before an Israeli attack in Tehran killed Ayatollah Khamenei, an account on the prediction market Polymarket made over half a million dollars wagering that Iran’s Supreme Leader would vacate office before 3/31. That account, named “Magamyman,” was not the only one to cash in on the attacks.

Half a dozen Polymarket accounts made over $1.2M betting that the U.S. “strikes Iran by February 28, 2026.” Those accounts were allegedly paid for through cryptocurrency wallets that had previously not been funded prior to Feb. 27. Overall, prediction market users bet over $255M on markets related to the attacks in Iran on the prediction markets Kalshi and Polymarket alone.

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.