Sen.
Lindsey Graham is warning that if President Donald Trumps latest diplomatic overture to Iran collapses, the United States is prepared to seize the Strait of Hormuz by force..
During an appearance on CBSs Face the Nation, the South Carolina Republican outlined his support for the administrations newly proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Tehran, while making clear he believes the effort is likely doomed. According to The Gateway Pundit, the agreement has already split Republicans and revived long?standing doubts about whether the Iranian regime can be trusted to honor any commitments it signs.
Graham stressed that he is willing to see diplomacy tested, but he did not mince words about the weaknesses he sees in the framework. The senator conceded that the memorandum is problematic and bluntly forecast, I think its going to fail.
Id rather try diplomacy than take it off the table, Graham said, underscoring that the administration is not rushing headlong into conflict. If you dont have a diplomatic path through the MOU, then you have to go to war or some other form of coercion. Lets try this. Lets try a diplomatic solution. I think its going to fail.
It was after that caveat that Graham delivered the most striking part of his interview, outlining what he believes will be President Trumps next move if Iran squanders this opportunity. He revealed that after spending four and a half hours with Trump last week, he is convinced the president will not hesitate to use hard power in one of the worlds most sensitive maritime corridors.
If this deal fails, President Trump is going to take the Strait of Hormuz over by force, Graham said, according to the transcript. The United States will control the Strait of Hormuz. Well charge a fee for all those who go through to pay for the operation.
Graham further warned that any attempt by Tehran to challenge American control of the waterway would be met with overwhelming military might. If Iran pushes back, he said, the United States would obliterate them.
The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow passage between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, is a critical chokepoint for global oil and energy shipments, giving it outsized strategic importance. Iran has repeatedly rattled sabers over the years by threatening to close the Strait, using that leverage to pressure the United States and its allies while continuing its destabilizing behavior across the region.
Graham also suggested that the failure of the MOU could paradoxically accelerate a broader realignment in the Middle East under the Abraham Accords. He argued that a tougher posture toward Iran, combined with diplomatic outreach, could bring Saudi Arabia formally into the U.S.-brokered normalization framework by 2026.
Were going to expand the Abraham Accords in calendar year 2026, Graham said. Were going to get Saudi Arabia to join the Abraham Accords, which is the biggest change in 5,000 years in the Middle East.
Critics in both parties have rushed to label the memorandum an Obama 2.0 deal, invoking the failed Iran nuclear agreement that showered Tehran with sanctions relief while doing little to curb its malign activities. On its face, the skepticism is warranted: any arrangement that eases pressure on the worlds leading state sponsor of terrorism should be approached with extreme caution.
Yet that comparison misses a crucial distinction at the heart of the Trump teams approach. This is not being sold as a grand, permanent peace accord but as a tightly limited, 60?day agreement designed to test Iran under the shadow of credible force.
President Trump, unlike the Obama administration, appears to recognize that the mullahs in Tehran do not respond to weakness, vague promises, or diplomatic fantasy. As the article notes, The Iranian regime responds to strength, leverage, and consequences.
The contrast with previous Democratic leadership is stark and central to the conservative case for this strategy. The difference between Trump and presidents like Obama is that Trumps threats are not empty. Obama drew red lines and watched Americas enemies cross them.
By contrast, Trump has cultivated a reputation for backing his words with action, forcing hostile regimes to calculate that his warnings cannot be casually ignored. Trump makes threats that foreign regimes actually have to take seriously.
Before opponents on the left and right dismiss the MOU as another exercise in appeasement, they would do well to recognize that it is structured as a short?term test, not a long?term concession. This is a temporary agreement that Trump still controls. If Iran violates it, abuses it, or uses it to stall, Trump is prepared to respond with force.
Login