\n<\/p>\n
WASHINGTON — <\/span>President Donald Trump\u2019s emerging deal<\/a> to end the Iran war<\/a> is drawing heavy criticism from some fellow Republicans who favor a harder line against the government in Tehran and fear a lost opportunity to finally rein in a longtime Mideast nemesis.<\/p>\n The deal the Republican president had said was \u201clargely negotiated\u201d has left a range of lawmakers, former Cabinet members and conservative analysts wondering aloud whether the terms as currently known will render the conflict all \u201cfor naught.\u201d<\/p>\n Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said the president’s decision to strike Iran was the \u201cmost consequential\u201d of his second term and that he should not let up now.<\/p>\n \u201cIf the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime \u2014 still run by Islamists who chant \u2018death to America\u2019 \u2014 now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz<\/a>, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake,\u201d Cruz wrote Saturday on the social media platform X. It was in reaction to Trump’s update after he had spoken with the leaders of Israel and other U.S. allies in the region.<\/p>\n Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who also is close to Trump, panned any deal that would leave Iran perceived as being a dominant force in the region and in which it would retain its ability to destroy oil infrastructure throughout the Gulf.<\/p>\n Sen. Roger Wicker, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, questioned the merit of a proposed 60-day ceasefire, saying it would be a \u201cdisaster.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cEverything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!\u201d said Wicker, R-Miss.<\/p>\n Trump, who has said he only makes good deals and detests being seen as not having the upper hand in any negotiation, dismissed objections to a deal that he said was not \u201ceven fully negotiated yet.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cSo don\u2019t listen to the losers, who are critical about something they know nothing about,\u201d he said on his social media platform.<\/p>\n Trump said the deal he and his representatives are working out is \u201cTHE EXACT OPPOSITE\u201d of a nuclear pact that Iran agreed to under the Democratic Obama administration. Trump pulled out of that agreement and has been trying to iron out a new one.<\/p>\n \u201cBoth sides must take their time and get it right. There can be no mistakes!\u201d Trump said.<\/p>\n He added that a U.S. military blockade of Iranian ports would remain \u201cin full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed.\u201d <\/p>\n Some support for Trump came from Capitol Hill, too.<\/p>\n GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, often a thorn in the president\u2019s side, defended the White House’s approach.<\/p>\n \u201cWar virtually always ends with negotiations,\u201d Paul wrote on X. \u201cCritics of President Trump\u2019s peace negotiations should give President Trump the space to find an American First solution.\u201d<\/p>\n Under the proposal, the war<\/a> would come to an end and Iran would reopen the strait and give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium<\/a>, with the details and timelines to be worked out during a later 60-day window, regional officials told The Associated Press on Sunday.<\/p>\n Polls<\/a> show the war, which began when the United States and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, is unpopular with the American public and has cost U.S. taxpayers at least $29 billion<\/a>, as of this month. Thirteen service members have been killed during the operation.<\/p>\n Trump initially said the war would be over in four weeks to six weeks, but the standoff continues. Iran’s closure of the strait, through which about 20% of global energy supplies transit, has jolted the world economy<\/a> and sent prices for gasoline and other goods<\/a> climbing. <\/p>\n Mike Pompeo, one of Trump’s first-term secretaries of state, asserted on Saturday that the emerging deal seemed to him to be the same as the Obama-era one from which Trump withdrew.<\/p>\n \u201cNot remotely America First,\u201d Pompeo said on X, prompting a profanity-laced rejoinder from Steven Cheung, the White House director of communications.<\/p>\n John Bolton, a national security adviser in the first term who has become a critic of the president, said the emerging plan details seemed to favor the Iranian government.<\/p>\n \u201cIf news reports about the impending Iran deal are correct, the ayatollahs will have won a significant victory,\u201d Bolton wrote Sunday on X. \u201cThey will be back on the road to nuclear weapons, supporting global terrorism and repressing their own people.\u201d<\/p>\n Secretary of State Marco Rubio pushed back on Sunday during a diplomatic mission in India, telling reporters at a news conference that no president has been stronger against Iran than Trump.<\/p>\n \u201cHis commitment to that principle that they\u2019ll never have a nuclear weapon shouldn\u2019t be questioned by anybody,\u201d Rubio said. \u201cAnd the idea that somehow this president, given everything he\u2019s already proven he\u2019s willing to do, is going to somehow agree to a deal that ultimately winds up putting Iran in a stronger position when it comes to nuclear ambitions is absurd. That\u2019s just not going to happen.\u201d <\/p>\n Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, a Trump antagonist who had pushed legislation to restrain the president\u2019s ability to wage war against Iran, told NBC\u2019s \u201cMeet the Press\u201d on Sunday that while the terms are not yet fully known, \u201cif Lindsey Graham and Ted Cuz are crashing out last night, I\u2019d say it\u2019s probably a pretty good deal.\u201d<\/p>\n