Follow us on social

Bipartisan lawmakers rush to battle stations after Iran attack

Bipartisan lawmakers rush to battle stations after Iran attack

Lawmakers who sat on sidelines as more than 33,000 Gazans killed want to join Israel in facing down 'disproportionate' response by Tehran

Analysis | Middle East

Members of Congress who have said little to nothing about the over 33,000 Palestinians dead amid Israeli bombs and artillery — two-thirds deemed innocent civilians — in retaliation for the Oct. 7 Hamas attack that resulted in the deaths of 1,200 Israelis, are swiftly calling the Iranian drone and missile attacks Saturday night a “disproportionate” response by Iran.

Iran was responding to the killing of seven of its officials in what has been deemed to be by many (except most pro-Israel Western countries) an illegal Israeli strike on the Iranian consultate in Syria on April 1. Saturday’s response by Iran has been called highly choreographed to send a message, even limited, and it was. After the missiles and drones started to fly, the Iranians literally broadcast that their message to Israel had “concluded.”

On Sunday morning, the Israelis and the U.S. reported that 99 percent of the more than 300 projectiles had been shot down by U.S. and Israeli defense systems. There were no deaths, but a seven-year-old girl remains in hospital with life threatening injuries. Her home in the Negev Desert was hit with falling shrapnel from an intercepted missile.

That hasn’t stopped howls from both Democratic and Republican members, many of whom have sat on the sidelines as tens of thousands of Gazans have been punished for Hamas’s attacks — killed, maimed, starved, displaced, or left unfound under the rubble. The Palestine Red Crescent Society said this week that some 1,000 children in Gaza have lost one or both of their legs. There were an estimated 17,000 children left unaccompanied and alone, as of February.

By all accounts on the ground, there is very little for Gazans to go back to if and when the attacks there ever stop. But Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), wants you to know that what Iran did on Saturday night was “terrorism” and “disproportionate” and a threat to "the free world."


Suddenly, it is as if dozens of AIPAC-funded members of Congress from both sides of the aisle were liberated to unleash self-righteous indignation at Iran, rushing to X and dutiful cable television cameras to outdo even themselves.

Here’s Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn (top AIPAC recipient) calling on President Biden to launch our own strikes against Iran:

Here’s New York Democrat Rep. Ritche Torres (another tippity-top AIPAC recipient):

GOP Sen. Roger Wicker (another top beneficiary of AIPAC and highest ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee) had this to say in a statement Saturday: “this is the moment for the United States to show we stand together with our allies. Our shared enemies, including Iran and their proxies, need to know our commitment is unwavering. We must join with Israel to ensure that Iran’s aggression is met with resolute action and resounding strength."

Here’s Democratic Sen. John Fetterman (Pa.) saying he disagrees with news that Biden has actually drawn the line on offering Israel offensive assistance in any new Israel attacks against Iran:

It is no question that Iran funds Hamas and works closely with its leadership. But after months of debate and discussion we still do not know definitively whether Iran directly helped to orchestrate the Oct. 7 attacks. More importantly we know now that Tehran has kept open communication with Washington to ensure that the war in Gaza does not spill out via its proxies in the Middle East. They have even kept pro-Iranian militias in check when it comes to attacks on U.S. military bases in Iraq and Syria (which may be rescinded if certain lawmakers have their way and Washington gets directly involved in Israel's fight).

Yet a limited, consultative retaliation for the second assassination of one of its senior officers since Oct. 7 is the doing of “terrorists” and "fanatics" for whom Congress must drop everything to respond, even if it means putting our own military servicemen and women at risk in the region, if not the homeland.

Lastly, one should highly consider the opposite view when John Bolton is out there calling for the U.S. to literally fight Iran alongside Israel: Remember, he has been a key supporter if not planner behind every foreign policy/national security failure since 9/11.

If he didn’t have such a public beef with Donald Trump we could very well see Bolton on the other side of the White House or Pentagon fences again. But does it really matter, with the amount of agitation for confrontation among Democrats and Republicans today? Best grab your gas masks and food supply — this is your War Party, in high gear.


Sen. Marsha Blackburn (lev radin./Shutterstock); Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee (shutterstock/lev radin) ;Sen. John Fetterman (shutterstock/OogImages)

Analysis | Middle East
Iran
Top image credit: An Iranian man (not pictured) carries a portrait of the former commander of the IRGC Aerospace Forces, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, and participates in a funeral for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders, Iranian nuclear scientists, and civilians who are killed in Israeli attacks, in Tehran, Iran, on June 28, 2025, during the Iran-Israel ceasefire. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto VIA REUTERS)

First it was regime change, now they want to break Iran apart

Middle East

Washington’s foreign policy establishment has a dangerous tendency to dismantle nations it deems adversarial. Now, neoconservative think tanks like the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and their fellow travelers in the European Parliament are openly promoting the balkanization of Iran — a reckless strategy that would further destabilize the Middle East, trigger catastrophic humanitarian crises, and provoke fierce resistance from both Iranians and U.S. partners.

As Israel and Iran exchanged blows in mid-June, FDD’s Brenda Shaffer argued that Iran’s multi-ethnic makeup was a vulnerability to be exploited. Shaffer has been a vocal advocate for Azerbaijan in mainstream U.S. media, even as she has consistently failed to disclose her ties to Azerbaijan’s state oil company, SOCAR. For years, she has pushed for Iran’s fragmentation along ethnic lines, akin to the former Yugoslavia’s collapse. She has focused much of that effort on promoting the secession of Iranian Azerbaijan, where Azeris form Iran’s largest non-Persian group.

keep readingShow less
Ratcliffe Gabbard
Top image credit: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA director John Ratcliffe join a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump and his intelligence team in the Situation Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. June 21, 2025. The White House/Handout via REUTERS

Trump's use and misuse of Iran intel

Middle East

President Donald Trump has twice, within the space of a week, been at odds with U.S. intelligence agencies on issues involving Iran’s nuclear program. In each instance, Trump was pushing his preferred narrative, but the substantive differences in the two cases were in opposite directions.

Before the United States joined Israel’s attack on Iran, Trump dismissed earlier testimony by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, in which she presented the intelligence community’s judgment that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamanei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” Questioned about this testimony, Trump said, “she’s wrong.”

keep readingShow less
Mohammad Bin Salman Trump Ayatollah Khomenei
Top photo credit: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman (President of the Russian Federation/Wikimedia Commons); U.S. President Donald Trump (Gage Skidmore/Flickr) and Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei (Wikimedia Commons)

Let's make a deal: Enrichment path that both Iran, US can agree on

Middle East

The recent conflict, a direct confrontation that pitted Iran against Israel and drew in U.S. B-2 bombers, has likely rendered the previous diplomatic playbook for Tehran's nuclear program obsolete.

The zero-sum debates concerning uranium enrichment that once defined that framework now represent an increasingly unworkable approach.

Although a regional nuclear consortium had been previously advanced as a theoretical alternative, the collapse of talks as a result of military action against Iran now positions it as the most compelling path forward for all parties.

Before the war, Iran was already suggesting a joint uranium enrichment facility with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on Iranian soil. For Iran, this framework could achieve its primary goal: the preservation of a domestic nuclear program and, crucially, its demand to maintain some enrichment on its own territory. The added benefit is that it embeds Iran within a regional security architecture that provides a buffer against unilateral attack.

For Gulf actors, it offers unprecedented transparency and a degree of control over their rival-turned-friend’s nuclear activities, a far better outcome than a possible covert Iranian breakout. For a Trump administration focused on deals, it offers a tangible, multilateral framework that can be sold as a blueprint for regional stability.

keep readingShow less

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.