WASHINGTON — As the dust settles on nearly four months of conflict between the United States and Iran initiated under former President Donald Trump, lawmakers in Congress are assessing the human, financial, and geopolitical costs of a war that they neither formally approved nor fully opposed.
The war, which culminated recently with a memorandum of understanding between the Trump administration and Iran, has sparked sharp debate over its strategic value and the terms of the ceasefire. The agreement, reached in Switzerland, opens a 60-day window for negotiations aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear program, while including provisions for potentially up to $300 billion in reconstruction and economic aid for Iran, a point of significant concern among many lawmakers.
Criticism has come from both parties. Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, a Democrat and member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, described the conflict’s conclusion as “pathetic” and a “failure” stemming from flawed strategy and a poor understanding of Middle Eastern dynamics. Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska expressed skepticism about the United States’ leverage in the deal, noting that the agreement does not appear to position the U.S. significantly better than before hostilities began.
However, some Republicans defended Trump’s actions. Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, former chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, argued that the president’s approach has ultimately made the country safer, acknowledging that a complete victory would have been unlikely.
Congress now faces the task of addressing the aftermath, including explaining the conflict to the public, replenishing military resources depleted during the campaign, and supporting efforts to maintain the fragile ceasefire and advance diplomatic engagement with Tehran.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has been advocating on Capitol Hill for the administration’s defense budget request of $1.5 trillion, a substantial increase that includes additional funding beyond what was provided in last year’s Republican-led tax package. Republicans in the Senate are considering a $350 billion boost to defense spending and are considering using the reconciliation process, which would allow them to pass legislation without Democratic support. Simultaneously, senators aim to impose restrictions on some Pentagon expenditures, including withholding part of Hegseth’s travel funds until reports are delivered on several issues, among them an investigation into a U.S. strike on an Iranian elementary school that caused more than 165 deaths, mostly children. Pentagon officials have acknowledged the strike resulted from faulty intelligence.
Congressional efforts to exert authority over the conflict saw mixed results. While the House passed a war powers resolution seeking to end U.S. military actions, it garnered limited Republican support, and the Senate repeatedly failed to secure the votes necessary to pass similar measures. Unlike prior conflicts, Congress did not provide formal authorization for the military campaign against Iran.
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), who serves on the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees, expressed cautious support for the president’s pursuit of a peaceful solution while recognizing the many unresolved questions that persist. The scale of the reconstruction fund included in the ceasefire deal has especially alarmed Republicans, who compare it to the previous administration’s 2015 Iran nuclear agreement that involved about $1.7 billion in released funds. Some, like Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), remain wary of committing large sums without stringent conditions attached.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, welcomed the end of active hostilities but emphasized the need for realism. She noted that none of the administration’s stated objectives had been fully met and that Iran gained notable concessions. She also highlighted the domestic costs, including increased expenses for American citizens and tens of billions of dollars in federal spending.
As the Trump administration passes the baton, Congress’s role in overseeing the aftermath of the conflict and shaping future U.S. policy toward Iran appears certain to be a complex and contentious process.