Vice President Vance was once again thrust to the fore in trying to calm GOP unease over the interim deal between Iran and the U.S. on Thursday. It\u2019s no easy task.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Several Republican lawmakers and a larger number of prominent conservative commentators are criticizing the deal. Their complaints vary in the specifics, but the common theme is that the memorandum of understanding (MOU) is too soft on Iran and does too little to protect American \u2014 and Israeli \u2014 interests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Vance went before the media in the White House briefing room to make the case for the defense. His core argument was that the most ostensibly generous elements of the MOU hinge upon Iranian compliance and will never become relevant unless Tehran plays ball.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe idea that they get benefits before they change their behavior is fundamentally a talking point that is issued by people who want the conflict to continue indefinitely,\u201d Vance said at one point.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
His reference to such people hinted at the GOP division between an \u201cAmerica First\u201d faction that leans toward isolationism generally and a more hawkish or neoconservative group that is aghast at the deal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Vance, who served in a noncombat role in Iraq as a Marine two decades ago, is identified very much with the \u201cAmerica First\u201d school of thought. He is widely reported to have been among the most skeptical members of Trump\u2019s inner circle with respect to the desirability of attacking Iran in the first place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But despite efforts from him and Trump \u2014 who held his own news conference the previous day as he prepared to leave a Group of Seven summit in France \u2014 criticism keeps growing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) on Thursday issued a scathing assessment of the deal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Wicker, the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, complained that the MOU \u201cnegotiates away the victories\u201d accomplished by the U.S. military in Iran.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Wicker further asserted that a proposed $300 billion fund for the reconstruction of Iran \u2014 which he acknowledged would not be bankrolled by American taxpayers \u2014 \u201cwould make Iran\u2019s payoff under President Obama\u2019s 2015 deal look like a pittance in comparison.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Mississippi senator also took issue with proposals that could ultimately lift sanctions against Iran or see currently frozen Iranian assets be released. And he condemned the fact that the peace deal encompasses the conflict in Lebanon \u2014 something that he characterized as a decision \u201cto force Israel to stand down against Hezbollah.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The deepening rift between the U.S. and Israel \u2014 and specifically between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu \u2014 is one of the most compelling elements in the current drama.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trump has, in recent days, criticized Netanyahu and the government he leads for actions that the U.S. president plainly sees as both disproportionate and unhelpful. During Trump\u2019s Wednesday news conference, he said that Netanyahu was prone to getting too \u201cexcited.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Using Netanyahu\u2019s nickname, Trump said of Israel\u2019s attacks on Lebanon: \u201cI say, \u2018You can do a little softer touch, Bibi. You don\u2019t have to knock down a building every time somebody walks into it that\u2019s from Hezbollah.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Tellingly, Vance amplified those criticisms rather than trying to tamp them down in the briefing room. \u201cThis does bother me,\u201d he said, to see members of Netanyahu\u2019s cabinet criticize the deal or Trump himself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time,\u201d Vance added. \u201cIf I was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I have anywhere left in the entire world.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In a separate podcast interview with Ross Douthat of the New York Times, Vance singled out two ultra-right members of Netanyahu\u2019s government, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cMy response to them would be: What is your exact proposal?\u201d Vance said. \u201cYou\u2019re a country of 9 million people. You can\u2019t just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The starkness of the message \u2014 and the fact that it is particularly unusual to hear a Republican administration use such a tone \u2014 won Vance some praise from unusual quarters on the left, just as Trump\u2019s criticisms of Netanyahu had done the previous day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But it also sparked consternation from those who believe the U.S. should be constantly at Israel\u2019s side.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Closer to home, the question is what the political and electoral ramifications of the Iran deal will be. The midterm elections are less than five months away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On one hand, the deal has laid bare these conservative divisions. It has also sharpened questions about why Trump, in conjunction with Netanyahu, launched the war in the first place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On the other hand, the war was unpopular, in part because of the spike in gas prices and broader inflationary pressure that it caused. Presumably, it is electorally prudent for Trump to get out of it sooner rather than later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When Trump alluded briefly to the conflict during a Medal of Honor ceremony at the White House on Thursday afternoon, he emphasized stock market gains and a decline in the price of oil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Although this came with the usual hyperbole, the Nasdaq and the S&P 500 did rise sharply on Thursday. Financial markets are plainly relieved that the Strait of Hormuz is reopening.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Vance, at the White House, immediately asserted that 12.5 million barrels of oil had transited the Strait \u201clast night\u201d \u2014 something which he said was \u201ca high since the beginning of the conflict.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Later, having previously pushed back with some semblance of humor at the idea that he was being made the \u201cfall guy\u201d for the Iran deal, Vance was also asked what he would say to GOP critics of the deal on Capitol Hill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Aside from urging \u201cfaith\u201d in Trump, he insisted: \u201cWe\u2019ve got to tell the story about what this means for Americans, how it\u2019s going to make us all safer and more prosperous.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Much hinges on how many people believe that story.<\/p>\n\n\n\n