With reports that the U.S. military is “prepared to strike Iran as early as this weekend, but Trump has yet to make a final call,” see below for Sen. Mark Warner’s thoughts on this situation.
- “I think it’s appropriate that the president has all the options on the table. But we saw when he has such a confusing foreign policy, we don’t know what’s going to happen. We know a month and a half ago, when the Iranian people were on the streets in massive numbers and the regime was so repressive, and [Trump] promised he was going to do something, then he couldn’t do that then, because we didn’t have forces, because his the aircraft carrier was off the coast of Venezuela on another military mission as opposed to being in the eastern Mediterranean. And our ability to leverage our allies in the region, and particularly in Europe, they were all distracted by his follies around Greenland. I can tell you now, I hope these negotiations go well, but having just come back from the Munich security conference, where there is great questions about, you know, what is the American foreign policy, are we going to be a dependable partner if we were to take action against Iran, our ability to really put pressure on the regime – and the regime is awful – is really going to be undercut by the fact that our Europeans, who have diplomatic relations with Iran, that have business relations, that could put more pressure on as well, I’m not sure they’re going to be fully there because of their uncertainty about the president’s overall foreign policy approach. So we may have our armed forces in the region and then never take that option off the table. But our ability to have some kind of concentrated, coordinated effort with allies in the region and allies in Europe, as opposed to simply United States and Israel acting alone, is really going to be undermined.”
- “First of all, remember the president said in our previous bombing that we had obliterated Iran’s nuclear program. While clearly our military did an exquisite job, we did not obliterate Iran’s nuclear program, number one. Number two, if the president is calling for regime change in Iran – and Iran is there’s an awful regime – but he should make the case to the American public and to the world of how we’re going to go about doing that. And to say we’re doing it solely alone with Israel, without even what may be the views of those states in the region – the Saudis, the Emiratis, the Qataris and others – whether they are going to be collaborating or not. Remember when we when Iran struck back against Israel, for example, early on stopping some of those missiles, it wasn’t just the Israelis and the Americans, it also included the Jordanians, the Brits, the French and others. And we now, if we’re going to do this without potential allies and friends in the Middle East and without our friends in Europe, my fear is, while we all would like the Iranian regime to be gone, are we putting American forces in too much harm’s way because we don’t have kind of our natural allies all on our side on this? So i’d like to hear the plan. I’d like to have it cleared out. I hate the idea that the American foreign policy is, is being going to somehow be dictated by the Bibi Netanyahu government. I strongly, strongly support Israel, but I sure as heck don’t always agree with the Bibi Netanyahu government. This this sounds like a bit of bluster at times when this is a dangerous situation. We all agree the Iranian regime needs to cut back. But but this kind of non coordinated approach is not going to get us where we need to be.”
- “I don’t know. I’d like to say I’ve been briefed. I’ve been briefed, and I just can’t tell you. I don’t know. Now, a president always has the right to take action, but normally when he doesn’t brief Congress or at least the Gang of Eight, that’s because there is some emergency that precipitates a quick action. And then you brief, you notify or brief right afterwards. And we’ve seen in the case of this administration, not even notification at times to the Democrats, which is totally inappropriate. And then on top of that, if this is part of a strategic plan to not brief congressional leadership, I think is a mistake. I think it goes against all norms and practices of other administrations, including Trump’s first administration. And if we are thinking about this and not including our European or moderate Arab nations, Iran still has capabilities. Clearly, Iran has been on the back foot after their proxies at Hezbollah and Syria have been set back. Clearly, the Iranian regime is horribly unpopular with the Iranian people. And gosh, seeing regime change would make make sense. But we don’t have the level of inside knowledge. Israel’s got better knowledge than we do about what’s going on on the ground in iran. But there are a number of other countries in the region that would have some ideas about what next, should the regime or certain people in the regime move on? I’m not sure we’re getting all that input, because I can tell you, coming out of out of the Munich security conference when not only Europeans but players from around the world who traditionally we have called on as allies, and that we also oftentimes use their intelligence as well. People are rightfully pretty damn pissed off at this president. And, for example, his callous comments about European nations that lost soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, supporting our troops and callously being, you know, that sacrifice being disregarded by this president. Or the craziness around Greenland. You know, the idea that that he is going to launch a war with just Israel at our side is not in the best interest of the United States at this point without trying to build up alliances, without also, frankly, having consultation with Congress.”
- “I took away [from Munich] that…this is an American established world order, post-World War Two. Other nations benefit from it, absolutely. And I agree with the president, the Europeans should pay more for their defense. But we benefit from this in enormous ways militarily, financially, having the dollar being the leading global currency. This is a two-way street. And at the end of the day, it was based not simply on a document, for example, that established established NATO. It was built upon a trust relationship. And that trust relationship has been so severed. I mean, in many ways, the most striking was some of our Canadian colleagues. I mean, and the idea that somehow Canada now views China potentially as a more stable, long term partner than America, that is not in America’s best interest. And what we were doing and virtually everybody, Democrat and Republican alike was saying, hey, you know, we still believe in this relationship. We still think we’re stronger together. You know, please, we still like you guys and, you know, and they would say, well, that’s fine. You may you as Congress may be individually, but what about your president? And why haven’t you pushed back more? And I couldn’t respond when you say why hasn’t Congress pushed back more, because some of the Republicans that were there were pushing back. But the fact that so many Republicans have simply gone along with this, I think slightly loose cannon, undirected foreign policy from this president where we burn our enemies [note: presumably he meant “burn our friends”] is flabbergasting. I mean, could someone – I know this is not the subject right now – but could somebody explain to me what this country’s policy, this administration’s policy is towards China right now? Are they a competitor? Are we going to sell our most advanced chips, or only with companies that we’re Americans got a stake in the chip companies where we get revenues. Is this totally moved away from where Trump wanted Biden and Obama about the longterm threat from China?”
- “I was not in the meeting with the Danes, but… the reports I got were pretty horrifying from both political parties, and I think there was a lot of pushback. You know, this is what, you know, we started the conversation about Iran and the fact that if there is a plan, why wouldn’t at least the Gang of Eight be briefed? If there is a plan, why can’t we see more evidence that we’re trying to recruit our traditional european allies and to be supportive if there is a plan? What is happening with our the countries who have been concerned about Iran for years, particularly the Saudis and the other Sunni nations in the region? And instead, we’ve got what we’re going to play this out in negotiations and then do what is this going to be a strike? Is this going to be a full-fledged war? I mean, there was at least the argument a few weeks back when the iranian people were on the streets, that a strike at that point might not have caused the Iranian people to rally around the regime, but actually the opposite. But we missed that opportunity in ways regardless of what was being said by the administration, because the normal military forces we would have in the region had been deployed on another presidential adventure in terms of dealing with Maduro and sending 20% of our fleet to blockade the Venezuelan coast. How long has that fleet going to be there? It takes the Venezuelan oil infrastructure three years to come back. Is 20% of our fleet going to be kept off the coast of Venezuela for 2 to 3 years? Lots of those sailors are deployed from my home state in, in Virginia, in Norfolk. I mean, what is their future? So this is of enormous concern. It has got me worried. You know, how many times, you know, can you say to the Europeans, hey, don’t believe or not, just the Europeans believe this, this is where defense and foreign ministers come from around the world. You know, it was a bit of an apology to her, you know, hey, this is not this is not how we all think or believe. But if they then say, well, the president is calling the shots, and even Congress is not pushing back in a bipartisan way, then you can say, well, hold on, the good guys are coming back, or the more rational folks are coming back, but that doesn’t go very far.”
- “We don’t have the luxury of saying, you know, well, you just got to wait three more years. And until and unless Congress reasserts its constitutional powers and until we continue to see, you know, what I fear is the attempt to politicize our intelligence community until, as we’ve just seen over the weekend, again, military leaders who were supposed to get promoted, being arbitrarily dismissed, one individual because I believe he worked for the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Mark Milley, who I believe President Trump appointed in his first term. This is a type of behavior that that has got our friends around the world reeling. And I just will leave you with this. America is not made safer if we don’t have friends and allies around the world.”
********************************************************
