logo
Democrats are at odds over response as Trump announces the US has entered Israel-Iran war

Democrats are at odds over response as Trump announces the US has entered Israel-Iran war

Yahoo7 days ago

After nearly two years of stark divisions over the war in Gaza and support for Israel, Democrats seemed to remain at odds over policy toward Iran. Progressives demanded unified opposition before President Donald Trump announced U.S. strikes against Tehran's nuclear program but party leaders were treading more cautiously.
U.S. leaders of all stripes have found common ground for two decades on the position that Iran could not be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. The longtime U.S. foe has supported groups that have killed Americans across the Mideast and threatened to destroy Israel. But Trump's announcement Saturday that the U.S. had struck three nuclear sites could become the Democratic Party's latest schism, just as it was sharply dividing Trump's isolationist 'Make America Great Again' base from more hawkish conservatives.
Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, noted that in January, Trump suggested the U.S. could 'measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.'
'Today, against his own words, the president sent bombers into Iran,' Martin said in a statement. 'Americans overwhelmingly do not want to go to war. Americans do not want to risk the safety of our troops abroad.'
Sen. Peter Welch, a Vermont Democrat, said the U.S. entering the war in Iran 'does not make America more secure.'
'This bombing was an act of war that risks retaliation by the Iranian regime,' Welch said in a statement.
While progressives in the lead-up to the military action had staked out clear opposition to Trump's potential intervention, the party leadership played the safer ground of insisting on a role for Congress before any use of force.
Martin's statement took a similar tact, stating, "Americans do not want a president who bypasses our constitution and pulls us towards war without Congressional approval. Donald Trump needs to bring his case to Congress immediately.'
Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine called Trump's actions, 'Horrible judgement" and said he'd 'push for all senators to vote on whether they are for this third idiotic Middle East war.'
Many prominent Democrats with 2028 presidential aspirations had been silent on the Israel-Iran war, even before Trump's announcement — underscoring how politically tricky the issue can be for the party.
'They are sort of hedging their bets,' said Joel Rubin, a former deputy assistant secretary of state who served under Democratic President Barack Obama and is now a strategist on foreign policy. 'The beasts of the Democratic Party's constituencies right now are so hostile to Israel's war in Gaza that it's really difficult to come out looking like one would corroborate an unauthorized war that supports Israel without blowback.'
Progressive Democrats also are using Trump's ideas and words
Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., had called Trump's consideration of an attack 'a defining moment for our party.' Khanna had introduced legislation with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., that called on the Republican president to 'terminate' the use of U.S. armed forces against Iran unless 'explicitly authorized' by a declaration of war from Congress.
Khanna used Trump's own campaign arguments of putting American interests first when the congressman spoke to Theo Von, a comedian who has been supportive of the president and is popular in the so-called 'manosphere" of male Trump supporters.
'That's going to cost this country a lot of money that should be being spent here at home,' said Khanna, who is said to be among the many Democrats eyeing the party's 2028 primary.
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who twice sought the Democratic presidential nomination, had pointed to Trump's stated goal during his inaugural speech of being known as 'a peacemaker and a unifier.'
"Supporting Netanyahu's war against Iran would be a catastrophic mistake,' Sanders said about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Sanders reintroduced legislation prohibiting the use of federal money for force against Iran, insisted that U.S. military intervention would be unwise and illegal and accused Israel of striking unprovoked. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York signed on to a similar bill from Sanders in 2020, but so far was holding off this time.
Some believed the party should stake out a clear anti-war stance.
'The leaders of the Democratic Party need to step up and loudly oppose war with Iran and demand a vote in Congress,' said Tommy Vietor, a former Obama aide, on X.
Mainstream Democrats are cautious, while critical
The staunch support from the Democratic administration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris for Israel's war against Hamas loomed over the party's White House ticket in 2024, even with the criticism of Israel's handling of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Trump exploited the divisions to make inroads with Arab American voters and Orthodox Jews on his way back to the White House.
Today, the Israel-Iran war is the latest test for a party struggling to repair its coalition before next year's midterm elections and the quick-to-follow kickoff to the 2028 presidential race. The party will look to bridge the divide between an activist base that is skeptical of foreign interventions and already critical of U.S. support for Israel and more traditional Democrats and independents who make up a sizable, if not always vocal, voting bloc.
In a statement after Israel's first strikes on Iran, Schumer said Israel has a right to defend itself and 'the United States' commitment to Israel's security and defense must be ironclad as they prepare for Iran's response.'
Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., said 'the U.S. must continue to stand with Israel, as it has for decades, at this dangerous moment."
Other Democrats have condemned Israel's strikes and accused Netanyahu of sabotaging nuclear talks with Iran. They are reminding the public that Trump withdrew in 2018 from a nuclear agreement that limited Tehran's enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions negotiated during the Obama administration.
'Trump created the problem,' Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., posted on X.
The progressives' pushback
A Pearson Institute/Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll from September 2024 found that about half of Democrats said the U.S. was being 'too supportive' of Israel and about 4 in 10 said their level of support was 'about right.' Democrats were more likely than independents and Republicans to say the Israeli government had 'a lot' of responsibility for the continuation of the war between Israel and Hamas.
About 6 in 10 Democrats and half of Republicans felt Iran was an adversary with whom the U.S. was in conflict.
___
Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick, Linley Sanders, Will Weissert and Lisa Mascaro in Washington contributed to this report
Adriana Gomez Licon And Thomas Beaumont, The Associated Press

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Iran admits U.S. strikes caused 'significant damage' to nuclear sites
Iran admits U.S. strikes caused 'significant damage' to nuclear sites

Yahoo

time36 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Iran admits U.S. strikes caused 'significant damage' to nuclear sites

June 27 (UPI) -- Iran officially acknowledged its nuclear sites had sustained "serious and significant damage" from U.S. air and missile strikes last weekend. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that while the extent of the damage was still being assessed by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, it was undeniable that the losses were substantial and that the country's nuclear facilities "have been seriously damaged." The admission by Araghchi in an interview with Iranian state television on Thursday came amid conflicting reports on the efficacy of the unprecedented military action launched by the United States against three nuclear sites on June 21. Earlier Thursday, Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khanamei claimed the opposite of his foreign minister, saying damage to the sites had been minimal and instead hailing the "damage inflicted" by Tehran's "victorious" retaliatory strike on the United States' Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar on Monday. The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump has said the strikes using 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs and long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles "completely and fully obliterated" Iran's nuclear program -- although public briefings have focused on the "primary site," a key underground uranium enrichment plant at Fordow, with few details forthcoming on the facilities at Natanz and Esfahan. U.S. officials have pushed back on a leaked preliminary report by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency that assessed the strikes had only set back Iran's nuclear development by a few months at most, with the White House calling its findings "flat-out wrong." Araghchi said inspectors from the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, might never be allowed back into Iran. Iranian lawmakers passed a bill Wednesday, effectively banning any future cooperation with the IAEA, which Tehran has accused of carrying out reconnaissance on behalf of Israel and the United States. The legislation has been waived through by the Guardian Council and will go forward to President Masoud Pezeshkian's desk for him to sign into law, or veto. "Without a doubt, we are obliged to enforce this law. Iran's relationship with the agency will take a different shape," Araghchi warned. The independent London-based Iran International said Tehran was considering quitting the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. However, Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei on Thursday, reasserted Iran's right to pursue peaceful nuclear development afforded to it by the treaty, according to state-run Press TV. Citing Article IV of the 1968 agreement, he said Iran was determined to keep its nuclear program going "under any circumstances." The statement came a day after Trump, announcing fresh Iran-U.S. talks, said he wasn't interested in existing or new agreements because the only thing the U.S. would be asking for was "no nuclear." Araghchi took to social media to claim Iran had conducted itself honorably and abided by international diplomatic norms, contrasting its record against that of European countries and the United States in particular, accusing Washington of treachery for attacking when Iran-U.S. talks were still in play. "Our diplomatic legitimacy was undeniable. In every conversation I had with foreign ministers, they either approved Iran's rightful position or were forced into silence. We stood firm, and even adversaries acknowledged our position," he said in a post on X. "We have had a very difficult experience with the Americans. In the middle of negotiations, they betrayed the negotiation itself. This experience will certainly influence our future decisions." Araghchi confirmed no resumption of talks was planned despite Trump saying Wednesday that the two countries would meet "next week." White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters at her regular briefing Thursday that nothing was "scheduled as of now," but that communication channels between the United States and Iran remained active.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store