Vice President Kamala Harris has named Iran as the United States’ No. 1 enemy, yet her approach to tackling the threat has been called into question.
In a recent interview with Fox News’s Bret Baier, Harris struggled to provide concrete solutions for addressing Iran’s growing influence, diverting instead to partisan issues.
Harris’ critics argue that her comments reflect a disconnect from reality, particularly when compared to former President Donald Trump’s hardline stance on Iran.
Stringent sanctions during Trump’s administration severely impacted Iran’s economy, drastically reducing oil sales from 2.9 million barrels per day in 2018 to just 385,000 in 2019.
Iran’s foreign currency reserves also plummeted from $112 billion to $14 billion during the same period, weakening its ability to fund terrorism globally.
When Iran acted aggressively, Trump responded decisively, most notably in the 2020 airstrike that killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. This response, his supporters argue, forced Iran to back down and reduce its threat level.
In contrast, under the Biden-Harris administration, sanctions on Iran have been relaxed, allowing the regime to generate $200 billion in oil revenue since January 2021. Experts believe Iran is now closer than ever to developing a nuclear weapon, possibly within weeks.
Critics also highlight the Biden-Harris administration’s payment of $6 billion to Iran in exchange for hostages just before the October 7 terrorist attack and their efforts to revive the controversial Iran nuclear deal. They argue that these actions have encouraged Iran, making it richer and more aggressive, as evidenced by recent missile attacks on Israel and the funding of anti-American terrorist groups in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq.
Iran’s influence has extended beyond the Middle East, with intelligence reports indicating the regime is actively interfering in U.S. elections and attempting to orchestrate the assassination of former President Trump.
While Harris has recently voiced a stricter stance on Iran, critics question her record of weakness over the past four years. For instance, she previously warned Israel against launching an operation in Rafah, threatening “consequences” if they proceeded — a move seen as aligning with the Biden administration’s pattern of being harsh on allies but lenient toward enemies.
Republican lawmakers, including Sens. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), and Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), are pushing for legislation that would reinstate stricter sanctions on Iran.
Risch’s “End Iranian Terror Act” and Hagerty’s “Iran Sanctions Relief Review Act” aim to reinforce existing sanctions and prevent the Biden administration from easing them without congressional approval. Ernst’s “PUNISH Act” would further codify Trump-era policies, ensuring sanctions remain as long as Iran continues to target American officials.
Despite bipartisan support for these bills, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has yet to bring them to the floor for a vote. As a result, Republicans have made countering Iran a top priority for the next legislative session, particularly if they regain a majority in the Senate.
With Americans increasingly looking back on Trump’s “peace through strength” strategy, many call for a return to his policies, believing they offered greater security for the United States.
Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, emphasised this sentiment, stating that a return to Trump’s approach is crucial for America’s safety after what he describes as four years of failed leadership under Harris and Biden.
