By rejecting resolutions to limit President Donald Trump’s war powers in Iran, Congress has at least temporarily allowed President Donald Trump’s military strikes in Iran to continue.
But that doesn’t mean lawmakers aren’t starting to sound concerned about the operations, particularly after a story claimed Russia is giving Iran information on the U.S. military.
A Washington Post report that Russia is providing Iran with information on the locations of American warships and aircraft prompted swift criticism from lawmakers in both parties on Friday — especially with the news coming hours after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the U.S. would ease Russian oil sanctions, allowing a 30-day waiver for Indian refiners to buy Russian oil.
While the House and Senate both narrowly rejected war powers resolutions to check Trump’s authority, bipartisan pushback could prove critical. Lawmakers have discussed more votes to outline the parameters of the conflict and to fund the military — measures that would require support from both parties.
“Russia is our adversary,” Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., said in a statement to MS NOW. “They hate us and what the U.S. stands for. The White House has had a moral blindness when it comes to Putin and Russia. We should be sending weapons to Ukraine and putting tough sanctions on Russia, and it should have been a long time ago. This has been perhaps the largest failing of this Administration.”
Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, a former chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said “Russia and Iran are locked in an unholy alliance,” saying the two can’t be separated.
“This is an intolerable escalation by the Kremlin — one they must come to deeply regret,” McCaul said in a statement to MS NOW. “I call on the administration to impose swift and severe consequences for this blatant attempt to endanger American lives.”
And Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., called the reported support for Iran “a serious escalation” by Russia.
“Russia has already deepened its military partnership with Iran through drone and missile cooperation while waging its brutal war in Ukraine,” Fitzpatrick said in a statement to MS NOW. “That growing coordination only reinforces the need to intensify — not ease — economic pressure on the Kremlin to limit its ability to support destabilizing actors.”
Fitzpatrick touted a bill he introduced in December to mandate sanctions on Russian officials, penalizing foreign actors who support Russian gas production and increase duties on Russian-produced goods, among other economic penalties.
House and Senate lawmakers narrowly rejected war powers resolutions this week, hewing close to party-line votes. But there’s been bipartisan discussion of votes on an authorization for the use of military force, which could outline constraints on the military operation. Members of Congress also say they expect a request for more money for the military, a proposal that would require bipartisan support in the Senate.
The report of Russian involvement could energize Democratic opposition to Trump’s plans in the Middle East, as well as Republicans with a hawkish stance toward Russia.
In a statement to MS NOW, Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo., called on Congress to “reassert its role in declaring war and conducting critical oversight.”
“Putin is murdering Ukrainians, and the President is letting him off the hook,” Crow said. “Putin only reacts to strength, but this President is only demonstrating weakness. Trump is getting played.”
And Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told MS NOW in a statement, “Given what Trump is doing, Congress should work to provide more support for Ukraine and end Trump’s war of choice.”
“Whether it’s attacking Zelensky this week or easing sanctions against Russian oil, Trump is clearly on Putin’s side even as he’s helping Iran strike US military assets,” Meeks said. The failure of the House and Senate war powers resolutions offered a reprieve for Trump, but only a temporary one. Meeks said he’ll offer another resolution if the hostilities haven’t ended within 60 days, which is the limit for the president to take military action without congressional approval under the War Powers Act. Republicans have said they may seek to rein Trump in, if his plans in Iran take long. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., opposed this week’s war powers resolution, but said he’ll want a vote on an authorization for the use of military force “if it becomes clear this is going to be a prolonged engagement,” he told reporters Wednesday. Other Republicans have said they think the Iran operations won’t expand to a legitimate war, while stopping short of drawing hard boundaries for the Trump administration. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters on Monday he expects Trump to focus on “using air and naval assets,” rather than boots on the ground, “to not completely eliminate, but certainly diminish the capability that Iran has in terms of ballistic missiles and naval threats as well in the region.” But if Russia is providing Iran with intelligence about U.S. military positions, and if the U.S. response is to ease up on Russian oil sanctions, it’s an easy bet that Democrats won’t rubber-stamp a defense supplemental if the legislation comes up. At the moment, military operations in Iran are costing about $1 billion a day in the early days of the operation. Trump would need 60 votes in the Senate for any funding measure, putting more power in the hands of centrist Democrats. Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., the top Democrat on the subcommittee that funds the Pentagon, said he expects a White House request for more funds. Coons told reporters Tuesday he “will continue to support our troops,” but that he will demand an open hearing with administration officials before he’ll support any extra funding.
Jack Fitzpatrick covers Congress for MS NOW. He previously reported for Bloomberg Government, Morning Consult and National Journal. He has bachelor's and master's degrees from Arizona State University.
Kevin Frey is a congressional reporter for MS NOW. Recommended
