logo
Thune warns Iran should return to negotiating table 'if they're smart'

Thune warns Iran should return to negotiating table 'if they're smart'

Fox News6 hours ago

FIRST ON FOX: Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., doesn't envision, nor want, the U.S. military becoming directly involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran, but that hinges on whether the Islamic Republic rejoins the negotiating table.
"Dismantling Iran's nuclear program is what this is all about," Thune told Fox News Digital from his office in the Capitol. "And that can happen one of two ways. It can happen diplomatically — voluntarily — or can happen via force."
Thune's comments come as questions and concerns swirl on Capitol Hill among lawmakers about whether the U.S. will take a bigger, more direct role in the burgeoning conflict in the Middle East. There are active conversations among senators about what role Congress should play in whether to thrust the U.S. into an armed conflict or if that power should be ceded to the president.
"The Israelis may not have the military capability to do everything that's necessary," he continued. "If the Iranians are smart, they'll come to the table and negotiate this in a way in which they choose to end or disavow their nuclear program."
Israel and Iran traded missile strikes for a fifth day following the Jewish State's late-night strike last Thursday, where critical infrastructure that would aid Iran in its pursuit of creating a nuclear weapon was damaged or destroyed. Notably, Israel has been unable to damage the heavily fortified Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Bipartisan resolutions requiring that Congress gets to weigh in and take a vote on going to war with Iran and disavowing an armed conflict entirely have circulated this week, while some lawmakers believe that the U.S. should go all in to snuff out Iran's nuclear capabilities and back up Israel as fighting rages.
President Donald Trump has so far refused to say whether the U.S. would use direct military force to prevent Iran from creating or obtaining a nuclear weapon, and he has continued to urge Iranian leaders to negotiate a nuclear deal.
Still, the president met in the White House's Situation Room on Tuesday with his National Security Team after leaving the G7 Summit in Canada early.
Ahead of that meeting, he said on his social media platform, Truth Social, "We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran." In that same post, he noted that the U.S. was aware of where Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was "hiding," but was not prepared to strike, "at least not for now."
But Thune was more cautious, and contended that "we'll wait and see what they do."
"I think right now, they're definitely on their heels," he said. "Their command and control has been taken out. Nobody knows who's really in charge."
"We'll see. If they're smart, they'll come to the table."
However, he hoped to see Iranians begin to rise up against the Ayatollah and believed that's when the "seeds of change" would begin to appear. He also noted that there are "a lot of things here that suggest to me, this may be that moment in time that we haven't seen since 1979," a reference to the Iranian Revolution that saw the overthrow of the monarchy in Iran and the subsequent creation of the Islamic Republic.
Asked whether lawmakers would put forward a supplemental spending package to further aid Israel, Thune said, "We'll cross that bridge if and when we come to it." But he envisioned that if one were necessary, it would be dealt with after the budget reconciliation process, when lawmakers work to fund the government during fiscal 2026 appropriations.
"I think, for right now, everybody is wishing the Israelis success and, again, hoping that the U.S. doesn't have to get further involved, but realizing what's at stake, and not only for Israel but for the region and the world," he said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Israel-Iran crisis: How vital is the Strait of Hormuz for oil market?
Israel-Iran crisis: How vital is the Strait of Hormuz for oil market?

Yahoo

time15 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Israel-Iran crisis: How vital is the Strait of Hormuz for oil market?

The flare-up of tensions between Israel and Iran has reignited concerns over the security of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital artery for the global energy market. This narrow stretch of water, just 29 nautical miles wide at its tightest point, funnels nearly a third of the world's seaborne oil and a fifth of global LNG. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) calls it the "world's most important oil chokepoint," underlining the strategic importance of the passage that links the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. Investors and analysts are weighing the implications of a potential disruption in this narrow but critical waterway. What happens if the Strait of Hormuz is suddenly sealed off? Following Israeli attacks on Iran, Iranian officials have raised the spectre of closing the Strait—triggering a sharp surge in crude prices. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), around 20 million barrels per day (mb/d) of crude oil and refined products passed through the Strait of Hormuz in 2023, representing nearly 30% of total global oil trade. Most of this volume—around 70%—was bound for Asia, with China, India and Japan among the largest recipients. While alternative pipeline infrastructure exists, it is limited. The IEA estimates that only 4.2 mb/d of crude oil can be rerouted via overland routes, such as Saudi Arabia's East-West pipeline to the Red Sea and the UAE's Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline to Fujairah. This capacity represents barely one quarter of the typical daily volume transiting the Strait. 'Any prolonged crisis in the Strait of Hormuz would not only disrupt shipments from key Gulf producers—Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Iraq and Qatar—but also make inaccessible the majority of the world's spare production capacity, which is concentrated in the Persian Gulf,' the IEA warned in a report. Related Israel kills IRGC intelligence chief and deputy, Iranian state media says Netanyahu says Israel has not ruled out killing Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Era of nuclear disarmament 'coming to an end', SIPRI warns Iran seeks international mediation amid conflict with Israel, Trump promises peace LNG markets are even more exposed to potential disruptions. All LNG exports from Qatar—the world's second-largest LNG exporter—and the UAE must pass through the Strait. The IEA reports that 90 billion cubic metres (bcm) of LNG transited the Strait in the first ten months of 2023, equal to 20% of global LNG trade. With no viable alternative routes for LNG exports from Qatar or the UAE, any maritime closure would severely tighten global supply. Around 80% of these LNG volumes are destined for Asia, while Europe receives roughly 20%, meaning disruptions would exacerbate competition between regions, especially in a tight market. 'The sheer volume of oil passing through the Strait and the scarcity of alternative routes means even brief disruptions would have significant consequences for the global market,' the IEA stated. While a full closure remains a low-probability scenario, analysts agree that the threat alone is enough to inject volatility into energy markets. Crude oil prices surged by 13% last week amid escalating tensions between Israel and Iran. Although prices have since eased slightly after reports confirmed that Iranian energy infrastructure remained untouched by Israeli strikes, the risk of further escalation—and potential disruption to global energy flows—remains elevated. In response, Wall Street analysts have been quick to assess the possible fallout from any interruption of oil and gas shipments through the Persian Gulf, particularly the Strait of Hormuz. Goldman Sachs warned that an extreme risk scenario involving a prolonged closure of the Strait could push prices well above $100 per barrel. The investment bank estimates that Iran currently produces around 3.6 million barrels per day (mb/d) of crude oil and 0.8 mb/d of condensates, with total seaborne exports averaging 2.1 mb/d so far this year—most of it heading to China. T ING's head of commodities strategy, Warren Patterson, indicates that the market has begun pricing in a substantially higher geopolitical risk premium in light of recent developments. Patterson stated that any disruption to Iranian oil flows would be enough to eliminate the expected oil surplus for the fourth quarter of 2025, likely pushing Brent crude prices toward $80 per barrel. Yet, the analyst warns that a more severe scenario—such as a disruption of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz—could be far more consequential. 'Almost a third of global seaborne oil passes through this chokepoint,' he noted. 'A significant disruption to these flows could drive prices up to $120 per barrel, particularly because most of OPEC's spare capacity is located in the Persian Gulf and would be inaccessible under such conditions.' "This escalation also has ramifications for the European gas market," he added. The Strait of Hormuz is more than just a shipping lane—it's a lifeline for global energy. With no easy detours for oil or LNG flows, its vulnerability puts markets on edge every time tensions flare in this region. A full closure of the Strait may still seem a remote event, but the mere threat is enough to rattle markets and keep oil prices elevated. As Iranian and Israeli forces continue to exchange strikes, the risk of miscalculation looms large. In a region where diplomacy is fragile and stakes are high, one wrong move could turn a regional conflict into a global energy crisis. Sign in to access your portfolio

Israel-Iran Conflict Continues, Trump Weighs Options
Israel-Iran Conflict Continues, Trump Weighs Options

Bloomberg

time15 minutes ago

  • Bloomberg

Israel-Iran Conflict Continues, Trump Weighs Options

00:00 What are Donald Trump's options at this point? Well, Tom, ever since President Trump left that G7 summit early to focus on the geopolitical situation in the Middle East, that has been the number one question. What are his options here? What is he thinking? Can we get insight into what is going on in President Trump's mind? We know that we had this reportedly one hour meeting with his national security team in Washington. There was no statement put out afterwards. So unclear what was discussed in that meeting. He also had a call with the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. No readout of that call either. But at this point, there is a lot of focus on some of the posts that he put out on social yesterday, and not only because of the content of what he's saying, calling for Iran's unconditional surrender, suggesting that the US know exactly where the ayatollah is. But for now, he's safe. However, at least think that in with the threats if Iran don't yield to the US terms, but also using the plural term, we are suggesting that the US are somehow already involved or even tacitly participating in the Israel campaign against Iran right now. So his options at this point are do they get actively militarily engaged as well? Do they start really deploying U.S. assets and aiding actively Israel with these airstrikes and attacks on Iran? Or do they push for the diplomatic channel and try to bring even out weakened Iranian regime with weakens military and defense capabilities in addition to nuclear capabilities to the table and try to get them to agree to terms. As previously discussed, the six rounds of U.S. Iran talks were supposed to take place on Sunday. They were canceled. In the meantime, the hostilities between Iran and Israel continue. More attacks overnight at the death toll in Iran hasn't been formally updated, but some human rights groups are saying that the death toll has climbed to more than 500, of which about 100 constitute security personnel. Some of those senior commanders in Israel, the death toll official figure is still sitting at 24. Of note, though, Tom, as well, the US embassy in Jerusalem is now closed for three days. Okay. So the conflict, of course, continues. And President Trump, as you say, weighing up what could be a monumental, potentially historic decision. What have other world leaders being saying about this conflict, about this war now, Joumanna? Yeah, well, you have to remember, President Trump on both his first term and his second term, talked about ending the, quote unquote, forever wars in the Middle East. He spoke about that when he was in Saudi Arabia just a couple of weeks ago. But it's interesting to hear that some other leaders around the world are a bit more cautious, namely because they are beginning to draw parallels between the decision to attack Iraq back in 2003 and the chaos that unfolded in Libya after military intervention there. Take a listen to what President Macron said on the sidelines of the G7 summit last night. No to military actions aimed at regime change because no one knows what comes next. Haven't we collectively seen the consequences this has had in the region and beyond? Does anyone think what was done in Iraq in 2003 was a good idea? Does anyone think that what was done in Libya last decade was a good idea? No. So the international community agreeing that Iran shouldn't develop the capability of an atomic weapon or nuclear weapon, but at the same time saying that going one step further and trying to push or externally force regime change doesn't have good results. If you take other episodes in history where that has happened in the Middle East, including in this example, President Macron talk specifically about Iraq and Libya, which is why many of the countries in the region, Arab states, the likes of Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia, all of them are pushing for mediation. They're pushing to restart those diplomatic channels, condemning the acts that Israel and the actions that Israel have taken only six days ago, and saying that at this point that what they did, the military aggression, actually violates the principles of the charter of the United Nations. So there is a bigger consensus of countries out there pushing for a diplomatic solution, looking to bring down the temperature and others going as far as President Macron suggesting that if you push too hard and regime change, it could have ultimately undesired consequences and potentially even lead to chaos.

Iranian Leader Says 'The Battle Begins' As Trump Pushes 'Unconditional Surrender' (Live)
Iranian Leader Says 'The Battle Begins' As Trump Pushes 'Unconditional Surrender' (Live)

Forbes

time17 minutes ago

  • Forbes

Iranian Leader Says 'The Battle Begins' As Trump Pushes 'Unconditional Surrender' (Live)

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued a warning to Israel in a social media post early on Wednesday, saying 'the battle begins,' a few hours after President Donald Trump directly threatened him and demanded an 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER,' triggering speculation about U.S. military involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict. In a statement on his main X handle, Khamenei said, 'In the name of Haidar, the battle begins.' The Iranian leader followed that up with a post on his official English language account saying: 'We must give a strong response to the terrorist Zionist will show the Zionists no mercy.' Trump reportedly talked with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday evening, following a meeting with security officials, according to Axios. Trump warned on Truth Social earlier Tuesday: 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding,' referring to Khamenei, who is increasingly isolated after Israel assassinated several of his top generals. Trump said Khamenei is 'safe' and 'we are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now,' adding 'our patience is wearing thin.' 'We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran,' Trump said in an earlier post, writing that 'Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured stuff. Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.' In a third post Tuesday morning, Trump called for an 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!' On Monday, Trump told reporters onboard Air Force One on the way back to the U.S. from the summit in Canada he wanted to see an end to Iran's nuclear program and said he's 'not too much in the mood to negotiate now.' Trump also warned Iran against targeting U.S. personnel or assets, saying if that happens 'we'll come down so hard, it'd be gloves off...I think they know not to touch our troops.' Trump attacked French President Emmanuel Macron on Truth Social, describing him as 'publicity seeking' after he said Trump was flying out of the G7 summit early to work out a cease fire between Israel and Iran and 'then kick-start broader discussions.' Trump said Macron 'has no idea why I am now on my way to Washington, but it certainly has nothing to do with a Cease Fire,' and claimed it was something 'Much bigger than that.' Trump departed the G7 Summit early and returned to Washington on Monday night to 'attend to many important matters,' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Trump said earlier on Monday evening: 'Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON…Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!' The president then blamed the situation on Iran's refusal to sign 'the 'deal' I told them to sign,' and added: 'What a shame, and waste of human life. When asked about the post, Trump said: 'I want people to be safe…That's always possible something could happen. I just want people to be safe.' It came after Israel's military issued evacuation warnings impacting around 330,000 people in the Iranian capital as it struck some parts of the city—including the main compound of Iran's state broadcaster, which was captured in a live show. In a post on X, Leavitt said Trump was leaving the summit early 'because of what's going on in the Middle East.' Shortly before he left Canada, the president told reporters Iran 'want to make a deal, and as soon as I leave here, we're going to be doing something. But I have to leave here.' Fox News reported on Monday evening that Trump had asked his national security to be present in the Situation Room when he returns to the White House. A U.S. official told reporters earlier on Monday Trump would not sign a draft statement of G7 leaders, which included a call for de-escalating the Israel-Iran conflict. The president eventually agreed to sign it after some changes were made to the statement's 'initial draft language,' according to the New York Times. The final statement notes: 'We, the leaders of the G7, reiterate our commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East.' The statement affirms Israel's 'right to defend itself,' describes Iran as the 'principal source of regional instability and terror,' and notes 'Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.' It also calls for a resolution of the ongoing crisis and 'a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a cease fire in Gaza.' In a post on X, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi signaled he was open to talks resuming talks with the U.S. if Israel's strikes on Iran were halted. 'If President Trump is genuine about diplomacy and interested in stopping this war, next steps are consequential. Israel must halt its aggression, and absent a total cessation of military aggression against us, our responses will continue. It takes one phone call from Washington to muzzle someone like Netanyahu. That may pave the way for a return to diplomacy,' he wrote. The post also attacked Netanyahu, calling him a 'war criminal.' Lawmakers Make Bipartisan Push To Restrict Trump From Going To War With Iran (Forbes) Iranian Missiles Cause 'Minor Damage' To US Embassy In Tel Aviv—Israel Targets Elite Quds Force HQ (Forbes) Israel Attacks Iranian State TV During Live Broadcast (Forbes)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store