More Stories
US lawmakers and expert witnesses called for a more aggressive US strategy to confront Iran's nuclear ambitions, proxy networks, and financial enablers at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Tuesday.
Rep. Michael Lawler, who chairs the Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee, opened the hearing titled “A Return to Maximum Pressure: Comprehensively Countering the Iranian Regime’s Malign Activities,” by contrasting the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” approach with what he called a dangerously lenient stance under President Biden.
“Joe Biden’s foreign policy decisions in the Middle East were ill conceived, disorganized, and at times fatal, including for US service members,” Lawler said.
He charged that Biden “left the world more volatile and less safe than he found it,” accusing his administration of “appeasing terrorists and enabling an “unholy alliance” between Iran, Russia, and China, with policies resulting in higher revenue flows from oil sales and an accelerated nuclear program.
He called for a crackdown on Iran’s oil exports—especially to China—arguing that “a nuclear Iran is not an option.” Lawler warned that “one way or another, Iran’s nuclear ambitions are finished,” and praised the Trump administration for “restoring the much-needed and most effective maximum pressure campaign.”
Norman Roule, a former US intelligence official and current advisor at CSIS, laid out the scope of the threat.
“Iran now appears capable of producing its first quantity of 90% enriched uranium, sufficient for one nuclear weapon in about a week. Tehran's current stockpile of 60% enriched uranium is sufficient for about seven nuclear weapons,” he said.
Roule warned that Iran’s military allies such as Hezbollah in Lebanon remain dangerous despite recent setbacks. “The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force aims to revive these groups,” he said, pointing to Iran’s attempts to reestablish influence in the Red Sea via Sudan as Iran's Houthi militia in Yemen continues its maritime blockade and attacks on US vessels.
“Iran looks like a country building a nuclear weapons program,” he said, although it “has yet to make the final steps required because it either fears discovery and the subsequent military consequences or believes its current approach offers diplomatic advantages.”
Claire Jungman of United Against Nuclear Iran focused on Iran’s financial backbone.
“Despite US sanctions, Iran continues to export over 1.5 million barrels of oil per day, earning tens of billions of dollars annually,” she said.
“These revenues are not just supporting Iran's economy, they are directly funding terrorism, nuclear escalation and regional destabilization.”
She emphasized the central role of the IRGC, adding, “Up to half of Iran's oil exports are now controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
“Every barrel of Iranian oil sold on the black market strengthens the IRGC’s hand bankrolling groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis.”
Jungman called for a sweeping enforcement campaign. “Sanction every vessel, registry, insurer, captain and port that helps move Iranian oil,” she urged.
“Cutting off the money is our best tool to constrain Iran's most dangerous activities.”
Dana Stroul, Director of research at the Washington Institute, argued the time is ripe for decisive action. “The Iranian regime is on its back foot,” she said. “The pillars of its security strategy… are more vulnerable today than at any time in the history of the regime.”
She urged combining diplomacy with a credible military threat. “The administration must keep its military options open by maintaining a robust US military posture in the region,” she said.
“Real opportunities exist to block Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapons capability… but the United States must lean into diplomacy as well.”
Witnesses and lawmakers alike agreed that Iran is under pressure, but without sustained enforcement, the opportunity to constrain its ambitions may be lost.
US President Donald Trump on Sunday warned of bombing Iran if Tehran fails to reach a deal over its nuclear program.
"If they don't make a deal, there will be bombing — and it will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before," Trump was quoted as saying during a phone interview with NBC News' Kristen Welker.
Trump on Friday also warned that “bad, bad things” would happen if Tehran did not agree to a nuclear deal.
Last month, Trump signed a directive restoring the so-called maximum pressure policy on Iran of his first term and warned of "catastrophic" consequences if Tehran does not make a deal on its nuclear program.
Trump's maximum pressure approach in his first term beginning in 2018 pummeled Iran's economy, causing a dramatic decline in oil exports and skyrocketing inflation.
Sources close to the US administration have said that Iran would be gone by September if it does not agree to a nuclear deal and begin dismantling its nuclear program, Daily Express reported.
"There is a clarity of purpose here. Iran's time is running out,” the tabloid cited an unnamed official with links to the Trump administration.
"If it (Iran) doesn't respond to President Trump's generous terms in return for allowing a full audit of its nuclear capabilities and the dismantling of those capabilities, Iran will be gone by September. It's as simple as that."
US President Donald Trump warned Iran of potential bombing if an agreement is not reached. Trump has also reportedly ordered the deployment of additional strategic air squadrons and a second aircraft carrier group to the Middle East.
A former senior Iranian lawmaker has criticized the United States and other Western powers for using the term “proxies” to describe militant groups in the Middle East backed by the Islamic Republic.
Mahmoud Abbasszadeh Meshkini, a hardliner, told the semi-official ISNA news agency: “Western powers, in an effort to deny the political virtues that the Islamic Republic of Iran has offered to the world, have turned to labeling tactics—using the term ‘proxy’ to describe heroic and resilient nations.”
Tehran refers to groups such as Lebanon’s Hezbollah and various Shi’ite militias in Iraq as part of the “Resistance Front,” while providing them with extensive financial, military, and political support.
The United States has called on Iran to stop funding and arming these groups as part of a peace proposal put forward by President Donald Trump since his return to the White House.
But Meshkini pushed back, saying, “If by the term ‘proxy’ the United States means that people around the world, inspired by the Islamic Republic of Iran, have come to value freedom, independence, and resistance—and have gained self-confidence—then we will strive to make the whole world our proxy.”
The White House is seriously considering an Iranian proposal for indirect nuclear talks, even as the US military significantly increases its presence in the Middle East, according to two US officials who spoke to Axios.
The deliberations come as Trump has repeatedly expressed his preference for a nuclear deal with Iran but warned that a failure to reach one within a timeframe he has set could lead to military action. The exact start date of Trump's reported two-month deadline to Iran remains unclear.
The consideration of indirect talks follows Iran's formal response to a letter sent by Trump to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in March. Iran rejected direct US talks as well as negotiating over its missile program and its support for armed regional groups, which the US has insisted must be part of any discussions.
While Trump had proposed direct negotiations, Iran has reportedly agreed only to indirect discussions mediated by Oman, which has previously played a mediating role between the two nations.
The US officials cited by Axios added that the Trump administration believes direct talks would be more effective but is not dismissing the Iranian proposal or Oman's potential role as mediator.
"After the exchange of letters, we are now exploring next steps in order to begin conversations and trust building with the Iranians," one of the US officials told Axios, emphasizing that no final decision has been made and internal discussions are ongoing.
More than one year of indirect talks with the Biden administration failed to produce an agreement. Those who believe Tehran might be playing for time see its demand for Omani mediation as a tactic to drag out negotiations until the end of the Trump administration.
Sources indicate an internal debate within the White House, with some officials believing a negotiated agreement is still possible, while others view further talks as futile and advocate for military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.
In a parallel move, the Pentagon is undertaking a substantial buildup of forces in the Middle East. The deployment would provide Trump with readily available military capabilities should he decide diplomatic efforts have failed.
The diplomatic maneuvering occurs against a backdrop of escalating rhetoric between Washington and Tehran.
Trump recently threatened to bomb Iran if a deal is not reached, prompting a sharp response from Khamenei, who warned of a "heavy blow in return" if Iran were attacked.
Iran has also lodged a formal protest via the Swiss embassy, which represents US interests in Iran, vowing a "decisive and immediate" response to any threat.
Tensions are further fueled by Iran's increased uranium enrichment, bringing it closer to becoming a nuclear threshold state, although Tehran maintains it does not seek nuclear weapons.
The Pentagon confirmed on Tuesday the deployment of additional troops and air assets to the region, with two aircraft carriers, the Truman and Vinson, remaining in the area.
Last week, B-2 stealth bombers were sent to the Diego Garcia military base in the Indian Ocean, a move a US official indicated was linked to Trump's deadline.
"Should Iran or its proxies threaten American personnel and interests in the region, the US will take decisive action to defend our people," Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a statement.
A threatened Iranian attack on British military facilities in the Chagos islands would spark a wider Middle East conflict, according to former UK military intelligence commander PhilipIngram.
His warning comes after Iranian forces recently called for a preemptive strike on the Diego Garcia UK-US pacific security outpost.
Ingram told Daily Mail,“Iran has the capability on paper to strike Diego Garcia. They know the US would respond by destroying the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps across Iran."
According to an Iranian military official cited by The Telegraph, Iran would strike the British-American naval base in the Indian Ocean if it is attacked by the US.
Dismissing the possibility of such an attack, Ingram said, “I think Iran is using rhetoric to threaten the Chagos Islands. They will have observed the debate in the UK and elsewhere about the islands' future.Fortunately, it is merely words on Tehran's part and intended to signal strength to their regional allies.”
