Congress Pressures White House to Explain Iran War, Summons Rubio and Others for Testimony

Democratic Caucus Chair Mike McCollum formally introduced a motion on the 25th, calling for the testimony of Secretary of State Rubio, U.S. Special Envoy Witkoff, and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, before Congress to publicly explain the U.S. military actions and diplomatic negotiations led by President Trump against Iran.

McCullum proposed the motion during a hearing hosted by the House Foreign Affairs Committee on modern arms control and international security. He expressed his hope that the three individuals would testify before the end of April, allowing Congress and the public “direct access to their explanations regarding the most pressing international security issues facing the United States today.” He emphasized: “If our committee cannot hold hearings on wars involving U.S. military forces, related diplomacy, and impacts on allies, then we are failing in our most fundamental oversight responsibilities.”

However, Republican Committee Chairman Mast responded by stating that the vote on the motion would take place only after the conclusion of the hearing. He criticized McCullum for not fully participating in classified briefings, even accusing him of arriving “45 minutes late.” He remarked: “If you had attended on time, you might have learned more.” The exchange quickly escalated into a heated verbal confrontation. McCullum countered that Mast was deliberately shielding the White House and evading oversight responsibility: “Your way of protecting the president is by preventing his officials from appearing… There can be no accountability, no oversight, no transparency—this must stop.” In response, Mast urged McCullum to attend more hearings and briefings—and arrive on time.

Meanwhile, the Senate continues to exert pressure on war decision-making. Democratic Senator Murphy recently reintroduced a war powers resolution aimed at limiting the president’s ability to launch military action against Iran without congressional authorization. Although the resolution was defeated 47–53, Murphy insisted such votes would continue.

Murphy stated plainly: “This is our only opportunity to debate this war—it’s tragic.” He criticized the administration for failing to clarify its strategic objectives and ultimate goals, noting: “If they’re unwilling to come to Congress to defend this war, it means their strategy and preparation are fundamentally flawed.” He warned that continued congressional absence from oversight roles would undermine democratic governance.

Since the U.S. and Israel launched air strikes against Iran on February 28, the conflict has persisted for nearly a month. While the Trump administration claims ongoing negotiations with Iran, Tehran has denied any such talks. Iran’s Parliament Speaker recently posted on social media asserting that Iran has conducted no negotiations with the United States.

The U.S. maintains that high-level officials—including Rubio, Witkoff, and Kushner—are actively engaged in diplomatic efforts to end the conflict. Previously, Witkoff and Kushner had discussed limiting Iran’s nuclear program and ballistic missile development under the mediation of Oman’s Foreign Minister Bousaidi.

Militarily, the U.S. has deployed approximately 50,000 troops in the Middle East, with an additional 2,000 personnel from the 82nd Airborne Division prepared for reinforcement. To date, the conflict has resulted in seven U.S. military fatalities due to Iranian retaliatory attacks, six deaths in an Iraqi aerial refueling aircraft crash, and 232 injuries.

Despite the escalating situation, Congress remains divided over whether to authorize the war. Under the 1973 War Powers Act, if a president does not declare war, they must notify Congress within 48 hours and seek authorization within 60 days—or else withdraw forces. However, in practice, presidents retain substantial discretion.

Most Republicans support Trump. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Risch stated: “The president will complete the mission… Those people across the table, stop these actions, don’t try to help Iranians.”

Yet Democrats continue to question the clarity of war objectives. Murphy pointed out that government statements on war aims have shifted repeatedly—from destroying Iranian missiles and nuclear facilities to targeting the navy and even advocating regime change. He warned that constantly changing objectives indicate a lack of clear strategic planning and risk dragging the U.S. into prolonged conflict.

Furthermore, the Pentagon’s request for approximately $20 billion in supplemental war funding has sparked controversy. Democratic Senator Blumenthal called the proposal “an unacceptable starting point,” warning it signals that the war may become protracted. Representative DeLauro noted that such massive military spending would exacerbate burdens on civilians.

At the same time, the conflict has extended into cyberspace. Congressional and homeland security officials report rising cyber threats linked to Iran, but the government’s strategy for safeguarding critical infrastructure remains unclear. Both parties are urging the executive branch to improve communication with Congress and enhance transparency.

In sum, from military deployments and diplomatic mediation to congressional oversight and cybersecurity threats, the U.S. faces mounting pressures in its confrontation with Iran. As Democrats push forward with hearings and votes, while Republicans stand firmly behind presidential decisions, the power struggle between Congress and the White House is expected to intensify further—leaving the trajectory of the war deeply uncertain.

Source: rfi

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1860670651763719/

Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author