Skeptical legislators about the ceasefire of Israel-Iran as a Trump Brokers

Legislators are impatient that the fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran are not detained, but many are not ready to call for a change of regime in the Islamic Republic.

President Donald Trump announced on Monday that Israel and Iran had accepted a truce, but as the evening took place in the short hours of Tuesday morning, if this peace would be questioned.

Trump nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize on the Iran-Iranel ceasefire agreement

President Donald Trump is unleashed in Israel and Iran with blasphemies for breaking the ceasefire. (Katopodis / Getty Images Tasos)

Israel is said to have prepared for a reprisals against Iran, and Trump accused both breaking the newborn truce. Tuesday morning, the president made a clear reprimand against the two countries.

“We have essentially two countries that have been fighting for so long and so hard that they don’t know what they are doing,” he told journalists.

On Capitol Hill, in the immediate wake of the announcement of the ceasefire, the legislators already examined the agreement with skeptically but had confidence that the president’s negotiation power would guarantee that the fragile break was not broken.

“I have the hope,” said representative Nancy Mace, RS.C., to Fox News Digital. “I trust the president. He was right on everything, and he is the only president who was able to bring Iran and Israel to the table in this way. I will therefore hope and pray that it works, and if this is not the case, then we know that Trump will act decisively.”

“ Not constitutional ”: Congress invokes a new resolution of war powers to reject Trump strikes on Iran

Rep. Nancy MACE, RS.C. ()

Trump’s announcement occurred in the heels of a weekend with bunker bombs which, according to the White House, have erased the Iranian nuclear program. Many legislators kept closed last week that the interest of supporting Israel in their bombing campaign against the Islamic Republic was to ensure that Iran could not do or obtain an atomic weapon.

Senator Eric Schmitt, R-MO., Told Fox News Digital that it was the work that Trump put in place during his first mandate with the Abraham agreements and his recent visit to Saudi Arabia which could help consolidate a lasting cease-fire between the two parties.

“All you can do is just believe that because of the events that occurred, I mean, Iran … Their conventional weapons have been decimated, their platforms have been decimated,” he said. “Their nuclear program has been erased. So they are at the table because of this.”

Senator John Hoeven, RN.D., told Fox News Digital that Iran had “generally never did what they said they would do”.

However, he thought that with pressure from the United States and Israel, and because Trump was willing to use force – which he described as the president showing that he “means business” – things might be different.

“I think they are going to come to the table now, and they are in a very low position, so it’s different, but their balance sheet is very bad,” he said. “You can’t count on what they say. So that comes to confidence Reagan, but check.” Everything we negotiate with them must be verifiable, and this is certainly how the administration will approach it. “”

However, even with a ceasefire, the Iranian regime remains unchanged. A common feeling among many legislators, however, was that if the change of regime should take place in Tehran, it would be necessary to belong to the Iranian people, not to the American government.

The senator of Virginia, Tim Kaine, who puts pressure for his resolution of the war powers to obtain a vote in the upper room, warned: “We really want to enter another war of change of diet?

“We changed the Iran regime in 1953 by leading a coup against their Prime Minister,” said Kaine. “And this is one of the reasons why the American-Iranian relationship is so bad 70 years later. Do we really want to start again?”

Trump “ does not need any authorization ” of the congress to strike Iran, says the expert

Senator Steve Daines speaks to the building of the Dirksen Senate office on January 15, 2025 in Washington, DC (Images Kevin Dietsch / Getty)

Indeed, the reversal supported by the United States of the Minister of the time, Mohammad Mosaddegh, opened the door to Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to take control of Iran. However, in 1979, the Islamic revolution took place and withdrew Pahlavi from power and saw the birth of the current regime.

Representative Jack Bergman, a retired marine general, has established his position against the change of regime in more succinct terms. “This is not our role.”

Senator Steve Daines, R-Mont., Hunted the president’s action this weekend and said that he thought that strikes had put negotiations on a path that could lead to a “change of generation” concerning the peace and future stability of the Middle East and the Western world.

However, he noted that “changes in diet can break one or two ways, but it would be difficult to do worse than what is there today”.

“I am carefully optimistic, but we are not there yet,” he continued.

Click here to obtain the Fox News app

However, not all legislators share the same feelings.

Representative Ryan Zinke, R-Mont., told Fox News Digital that he thought that the United States should take a stronger posture with regard to the change of diet in Iran.

“I am a Navy Seal commander who spent time there and buried many of my friends,” he said. “While the attack was brilliant, and it was misleading, and it made a statement, etc., etc., I don’t think Iran will bend. I think it will take a change of diet.”