For Iran hawks on the right, Tuesday night was initially time to revel in how President Donald Trump had again proven his detractors wrong with his supposed “Art of the Deal” win in obtaining a ceasefire in the ongoing war.
But by Wednesday morning, that revelry gave way to some genuine concern about what Trump was willing to concede to extract himself from the conflict.
There is a lot still unknown about the ceasefire deal. But some aspects are raising alarms on the right.
For one, there’s no real word about what might happen with Iran’s uranium. Second, Trump on Tuesday night said a 10-point Iranian plan for peace was a “workable basis on which to negotiate,” but Iran’s public version of those 10 points are heavily slanted in Tehran’s favor — including a recognized right to enrich uranium, reparations paid to Iran and the lifting of all sanctions.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday afternoon that Trump’s statement is referring to a separate, privately discussed plan. She added that the public one was deemed “unserious.”
“The president’s red lines, namely, the end of uranium enrichment in Iran, have not changed,” Leavitt said.
Still, Leavitt did not offer any details about the private deal. And, while she said the ceasefire required the Strait of Hormuz to be fully reopened with “no limitations,” Iranian officials are indicating that the agreement hands Tehran control of the strait, the world’s most important maritime chokepoint.
As the last 40 days have shown, Iran can use such control to effectively hold the international economy hostage. Already, Iranian media is reporting that Tehran is halting oil tanker traffic through the strait after Israel attacked Lebanon.
CNN’s Fareed Zakaria said late Tuesday that conceding even temporary control of the strait to Tehran amounted to handing Iran a “weapon” that is “far more usable than nuclear weapons.” He added that it conflicts with more than 200 years of American foreign policy, which has prioritized freedom of navigation.
There is no doubt that US and Israeli forces have killed many high-profile Iranian leaders and left the country’s military badly diminished. But control of the strait could be a huge lifeline for Iran moving forward.
And Trump is at least talking like this could be a workable part of a more permanent deal. In comments to ABC News’ Jonathan Karl on Wednesday morning, Trump floated “a joint venture” in which the US and Iran would charge tolls for ships to pass.
“It’s a beautiful thing,” he added. Leavitt confirmed the idea would be discussed over the next two weeks.
But Trump allies who are more hawkish on Iran seem to see this as dangerous rather than beautiful.
Perhaps most striking have been a series of posts on X from Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, one of the most vocal proponents of the war.
Shortly after Trump announced the deal, Graham posted: “We must remember that the Strait of Hormuz was attacked by Iran after the start of the war, destroying freedom of navigation.”
“Going forward, it is imperative Iran is not rewarded for this hostile act against the world,” the South Carolina Republican added.
He even argued that Congress, which hasn’t seen fit to officially authorize the war, must vote on any deals to end it — comparing it to congressional approval of former President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran.
By Wednesday morning, Graham showered Trump with praise while also warning him about giving Iran too much leeway on the uranium issue.
“Allowing this regime to enrich in the future would be an affront to all those murdered by the regime since this war started and would be inconsistent with denying Iran a pathway toward a bomb in the future,” Graham said.
Another key voice in Trump’s ear, Fox News host Mark Levin, has made similar comments.
Shortly after the ceasefire was announced, Levin cautioned on Sean Hannity’s show that people should “make no mistake: they are the enemy.”
“They’re not going to go away if there’s not regime change,” Levin said. “And we’re going to have to figure out — and it’s not going to be easy — how to keep our foot on their throat.”
By Wednesday morning, Levin called Iran’s public 10-point proposal “an absolute disaster.”
Some Republicans interviewed on CNN have also projected caution.
In an interview with CNN’s Kate Bolduan, centrist Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska rejected Trump’s idea of a joint US-Iran venture in the Strait of Hormuz.
“Here’s the concern,” Bacon added. “The government’s still in place, and we should be negotiating from a position of strength, not a position that’s good for them.”
And in an interview with CNN’s John Berman, conservative Rep. Ben Cline of Virginia repeatedly avoided weighing in on the idea that Iran could make money off the strait — before eventually rejecting it.
“No one’s going to be OK with that kind of continued tax by Iran on ships going through the strait,” Cline said.
Cline’s interview suggests that Republicans might be reluctant to publicly break with Trump on a deal with Iran. But concern is clearly percolating among the president’s allies, especially on social media. The way in which Graham and Levin are trying to steer any potential deal is especially telling.
Trump loves to hyperbolize his accomplishments and will no doubt tout this as an amazing deal only he could get. Usually, his base eventually accepts that talking point.
But that won’t be so easy when it comes to ending this war.
People like Graham and Levin feel very strongly about what needs to be done with Iran, and this is their best chance to exert maximum pressure on the regime — to really get what they want. They won’t be inclined to accept half-measures or major concessions to Iran in the name of toeing Trump’s line.
The problem comes if the president decides he just needs to get out of this, politically speaking — and if Iran keeps holding a hard line. Trump also tends to want to cut deals that turn foes into friends or at least business partners, but that would seem pretty fanciful with Iran’s regime.
The negotiations will continue — including internal ones on the American right.
