Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_180495389-scaled

GOP Senator: 'We have to be open to' lifting terror label on Iran military wing

Delisting the IRGC is a remaining hurdle to reviving the nuclear deal and Rand Paul may have helped create space for Biden to get it done.

Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

As the negotiations to re-enter the Iran nuclear deal drag on in a stalemate, one of the main sticking points has reportedly been Iran's demand that its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps be removed from the U.S. list of foreign terrorist organizations. One of the primary obstacles standing in the way of the Biden administration moving forward with that concession is its fear of domestic political blowback. But one Republican U.S. senator said during a hearing on Wednesday that U.S. negotiators need to seriously consider it. 

“I think we have to be open to it,” Sen. Rand Paul told President Biden’s Special Envoy for Iran Rob Malley, adding that he thinks — given the likely domestic political attacks Biden will be forced to endure for delisting the IRGC — any proposals for what the United States asks for in return should be made public. 

“I think it’s important that if we do want negotiations and the only way we’re going to get any behavioral change is through negotiations, … actually lessoning sanctions is the only way you get it,” Paul said. “So even things such as labeling them as a foreign terrorist organization have to be negotiated.”

The Trump administration designated the IRGC a terror group as part of its failed “maximum pressure” campaign primarily, as its advocates have openly admitted, to serve as a poison pill aimed at making it politically more difficult for any future administration to return to the JCPOA. Indeed, the Senate passed a non-binding measure earlier this month prohibiting President Biden from delisting the IRGC as a foreign terrorist organization.

Experts have noted that the designation is purely symbolic and that delisting the IRGC would have little or no practical consequences, a point that Sen. Paul echoed during the hearing. 

“I think people should realize that even if we got rid of the foreign terrorist organization label, the IRGC has been … under sanctions at least since 2007 for funding Hezbollah in Lebanon, so there still would be sanctions,” he noted, adding, “But we have to at least think this through. The only way you get anywhere is you have to give something they want and they give something we want.” 

Malley also appeared to contradict reporting this week that President Biden has made a final decision not to remove the IRGC as an FTO, suggesting that the door may still be open to resolving the issue if the Iranians are willing to make concessions in return. 

“We made clear to Iran that if they wanted any concession on something that was unrelated to the JCPOA, like the FTO designation, we needed something reciprocal from them that would address our concerns,” he said. “Iran has made the decision that it’s not prepared to take the reciprocal step.”


Editorial credit: Christopher Halloran / Shutterstock.com
google cta
Reporting | Middle East
Colby: Israel is fighting a different war in Iran
Top image credit: Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby speaks at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee. (Screengrab via armed-services.senate.gov)

Colby: Israel is fighting a different war in Iran

QiOSK

The U.S. is pursuing “scoped and reasonable objectives” in its military campaign against Iran and is not seeking regime change through force, argued Undersecretary of Defense Elbridge Colby in a Tuesday Senate hearing.

When pressed about why the campaign began with the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Colby declined to comment directly. “I’m talking about the goals of the American military campaign,” he told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Those are Israeli operations.”

keep readingShow less
US missiles
Top photo credit: . DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Vince Parker, U.S. Air Force.

Trump: We have 'unlimited' weapons to fight 'forever' war

QiOSK

In a startling Truth Social post overnight on Monday, President Donald Trump defied reality and claimed that U.S. weapons were "unlimited" and the U.S. could fight "forever" with "these supplies."


keep readingShow less
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

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.