Lawmakers, National Security Experts Skeptical of Trump’s Iran Diplomacy

Pro-Israel lawmakers from both parties as well as national security experts are expressing deep skepticism towards the Trump administration’s push for a nuclear deal with Iran, set to formally begin this weekend with talks in Oman. Their views reflect a widespread consensus that an adequate deal that would fully dismantle Iran’s nuclear program will be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve.

Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, who will lead the negotiations, has suggested the U.S. is open to a deal requiring verification to ensure that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon — a similar configuration as the Obama administration’s 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — rather than full dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program, which Iran hawks say must be non-negotiable.

Other administration officials, such as National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, have said the U.S. will demand Iran’s nuclear program be dismantled.

President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that he would pursue military action against Iran’s nuclear program if it becomes necessary, with Israel taking the lead role in any potential strikes.

Many lawmakers have told JI repeatedly in recent weeks that they’re skeptical of nuclear talks with the regime, and doubtful that they would yield results.

Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) said that any deal with Iran must involve the dismantling of its nuclear program, a condition the regime is unlikely to accept.

“I think we need to tell Iran that we can do this the easy way or the hard way, and they need to make a deal. I personally don’t think Iran should have a nuclear weapon, or that we should allow them to get a nuclear weapon,” Kennedy said. “But equally important, and I can tell you, if they get a nuclear weapon or are right on the very threshold of getting a nuclear weapon, the state of Israel is going to bomb them into the stone age. It’s just that simple.”

Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) similarly said he opposes nuclear talks with Tehran. “I’m unsure of the value in negotiating. I would rather have them just destroy” Iran’s nuclear facilities, Fetterman told Jewish Insider.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said on X that any deal with Iran “must recognize Iran’s decades of cheating, the regime’s barbaric nature and its open commitment to destroying the state of Israel” as well as “include the total dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure” under international supervision.

“I fear anything less could be a catastrophic mistake,” Graham continued.

Michael Makovsky, the CEO of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, said he was “disappointed” that the talks were happening, adding that Iran was more likely to use the talks to buy time than to agree to fully destroy its nuclear program.

He credited Trump with saying that the issue must be resolved quickly, “but the Iranians generally don’t work that way, and they’re pretty master negotiators in their own right. So to me, a very concerning development overall.” Makovsky said he’s hopeful Trump will keep to his word and walk away from the talks if a deal cannot be reached quickly.

“We have a lot of U.S. forces there in the region. I think there’s a limit of how long they could stay. And there are other deadlines to consider like snapback and so on, and that’s my biggest concern,” Makovsky said. The U.N. Security Council’s authority to re-impose sanctions on Iran expires in October, but European partners have said a decision must be made significantly sooner than that.

Several Republican lawmakers said they’re specifically concerned about Witkoff serving as the lead U.S. negotiator in the talks. Privately, some said they’re worried that Witkoff lacks the knowledge, experience and judgement to properly handle the sensitive negotiation and could end up sealing an unsatisfactory deal.

“It’s a f—ing disaster,” one Republican lawmaker told JI of Witkoff leading negotiations, adding that they were worried about what kind of deal Witkoff was going to deliver. “I’m not sure an American condo development in Tehran is the best solution for the existential threats we face.”

“I don’t think he’s qualified to be a negotiator on behalf of the United States,” one senior GOP lawmaker said, citing Witkoff’s lack of foreign policy experience and “what we’ve seen of his performance during these early days of the administration.”

Witkoff has been a key player in negotiations with Hamas over a ceasefire and release of hostages from Gaza and with Russia over the war in Ukraine and the successful release of Americans held by Moscow. Efforts to extend the Gaza ceasefire failed, and Ukraine ceasefire talks have proven elusive.

But Witkoff’s media comments that Hamas could remain politically involved in Gaza following the war, saying he may have been “duped” by the terrorist group, defending Qatar, defending Russian President Vladimir Putin and otherwise appearing to accept Russian narratives on the conflict in Ukraine have repeatedly raised alarms among elected Republicans.

One GOP senator defended Witkoff, saying, “I worry less than I used to about him anymore. I’ve gotten to know Steve quite well. The things that make us all nervous about his desire to get a deal done, whatever that is, it’s also what keeps him from letting emotion push him away from some potential progress. I don’t think this is easy for him.”

Saeed Ghasseminejad, a senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, suggested that Witkoff is out of his depth and is at risk of being outmaneuvered.

“[Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas] Araghchi has tons of experience doing these negotiations over the nuclear issue … [The Iranians] really know the ins and outs of the dossier,” Ghasseminejad said. “Witkoff doesn’t have that experience and since he joined he has been doing Ukraine and Gaza — each of them is a very heavy portfolio — and now Iran. Based on the interviews I listen to, it doesn’t seem that he has a very good grasp of what’s going on.”

Ghasseminejad said it’s important that the lead U.S. negotiator have a strong grasp of the issue and that he’s worried that Witkoff is at risk of being “duped” by Iran, as Witkoff said he may have been by Hamas.

Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he doesn’t know Witkoff personally well enough to render a judgement but said he hopes that he’ll surround himself with knowledgeable experts.

“One of the problems,” Reed said of the Trump administration, “is they’re trying their darnedest to get rid of all the experts in every department in the government.”

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly defended Witkoff in a statement.

“Steve Witkoff has already secured the release of hostages trapped in Russia and Gaza. President Trump has the utmost confidence in his ability to represent our country, and his results speak for themselves,” Kelly said.

And several additional Republican senators publicly expressed support for Trump’s decision to dispatch Witkoff to the Middle East.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) said that Witkoff “has done a great job in Israel … he’s been working hard in Russia, so it makes sense.”

“As long as he goes in with eyes wide open, knowing that they are liars and three to six months away from breaking out, why not chat?” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) said.

Dana Stroul, the director of research at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a senior Pentagon official in the Biden administration, told JI that the efforts to negotiate with Iran are similar to those undertaken by multiple previous administrations but Iran is significantly more vulnerable now than during those previous rounds of talks.

“It’s just a very pressurized atmosphere,” Stroul said, referencing the looming deadlines imposed by Trump himself, the U.S. military deployments in the Middle East and the U.N. snapback sanctions.

She said that recent military deployments, particularly dispatching half of the U.S.’ B-2 bomber fleet to Diego Garcia and moving assets from the IndoPacific to the Middle East “signals real seriousness.”

“One [question] is how the Iranians read the situation, because the actions suggest real seriousness but the rhetoric in some ways doesn’t quite match it,” Stroul said, pointing to Trump’s comments that he is reluctant to pursue war. “That ambiguity is where the Iranians are going to try to exploit.”

Stroul said that Trump’s two-month timeline for talks also coincides roughly with his trip to meet with leaders of Arab Gulf states, whom she predicted would pressure Trump against attacking Iran. “War is the last thing these guys want, and he’s going to hear that message loud and clear.”

She further predicted that tensions between the U.S. and its European allies, who will not be involved in the talks, and the fact that Russia and China are now actively working with Iran, will further complicate the talks.

Makovsky said that one potential positive element to the talks could be that, if Iran is intransigent and the U.S. walks away quickly, it would show other partners that Iran is not willing to negotiate. “But if the talks drag on and the U.S. makes concessions that we shouldn’t make, then it’s going to put Israel in a difficult position.”

Makovsky said that the large U.S. military presence in the region could help shield Israel from retaliation if Iran attacks again, adding that “Israel is going to have to make its own decision soon.”

He argued that the U.S. should demand Iran make significant and early concessions in the coming weeks, or walk away from the talks, adding that he would have preferred to see the U.S. demand some concessions in exchange for opening negotiations at all.

“[Trump] has a real opportunity here to set the tone … by being tough with Iran,” Makovsky said. “That means a really terrific deal that leads to Libya-style dismantling of the nuclear program, or supporting an Israeli operation, or collaborating with the Israelis on a military campaign.”

Stroul said that concrete signals that Iran is not serious about the talks would be if it withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, took steps to move toward weaponization or if intelligence suggested that Iran’s leaders had made the political decision to seek a bomb.

She said that signs that Iran is actually acting on good faith would be if International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors were allowed back into the country and given access to sites and information related to the program, and if Tehran were to take preparations to down-blend its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

Stroul added that she’s hopeful that Witkoff’s past comments calling for limits on the Iranian nuclear program instead of dismantlement are not reflective of the Trump administration’s position, noting that other administration officials had walked back those comments.

“The challenge with the negotiating team at this moment is that they appear not to be taking advice from technical experts,” Stroul said. “They’re actually in the process of dismantling and terminating a lot of the technical experts … that would have the expertise on exactly how you have a verified deal that blocks all pathways to a nuclear device. So hopefully Witkoff is not going by himself, but he’s actually bringing a team of both sanctions and non-proliferation and nuclear technical experts with him.”

She added that Witkoff has made “some unforced errors with statements … on a variety of the high-stakes issues which the President has charged him to negotiate” and said that there’s a risk that “our adversaries are also paying attention to those misstatements and looking at ways to exploit them.”

Originally published in Jewish Insider.