Vice President JD Vance walked into the lion’s den on Tuesday evening, taking a seat as a guest co-host on Fox News’ “The Five” while promoting his new book, “Communion: Finding My Way Back to Faith.” What started as a discussion about faith and public life quickly turned into a sharp exchange over the Biden administration’s newly announced agreement with Iran, and Vance was not interested in letting Democratic talking points go unchallenged.
During the segment, co-host Jessica Tarlov cited reports from The Wall Street Journal and Axios suggesting that CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Secretary of State Marco Rubio had concerns about aspects of the agreement. Tarlov argued that Iran stood to gain significant economic benefits under the arrangement, including access to hundreds of billions of dollars in potential investment and economic activity.
Vance immediately pushed back, accusing critics of presenting a one-sided version of the deal that ignored the substantial concessions Iran would be required to make.
“Jessica, you’re making the same mistake, unfortunately, that a lot of the Iranian propagandists make when they talk about this,” Vance said.
The vice president argued that opponents focus exclusively on what Iran could potentially receive while failing to mention the conditions attached to those benefits.
“They talk about the benefits to the Iranians without any of the things the Iranians would have to give up and have to change in order to get those benefits,” Vance explained.
The exchange intensified when Tarlov suggested that Iran would still gain access to enormous financial resources. Vance was quick to draw a bright line between American taxpayer dollars and foreign investment.
“So you mentioned $300 billion fund, let’s be clear about this, not a single cent of American money under any circumstance, no matter what the Iranians do, goes to Iran, not a single cent of American money!” he said.
When Tarlov responded, “But they got other money,” Vance elaborated on how the arrangement would actually function.
According to Vance, the agreement merely allows allied nations such as the United Arab Emirates to invest in Iran if Tehran fully complies with a long list of requirements established by the United States and its partners.
“This says, for example, let’s say that the United Arab Emirates, who have been a great ally, let’s say they want to invest in a power plant in Iran,” Vance explained. “If the Iranians have done everything we require them to do, then we will allow the United Arab Emirates to do that.”
Vance emphasized that the economic incentives are entirely conditional and depend on a dramatic change in Iranian behavior.
“We’re fundamentally saying if the Iranians transform how they interact with the world, we will transform how the world economy interacts with Iran,” he said.
The vice president argued that critics are presenting a misleading picture by discussing potential rewards without acknowledging the strict requirements attached to them.
“But if they don’t do any of that stuff, they don’t get any of these benefits,” Vance said. “So I think all the Democrats who are saying, well, the Iranians get all these things, they don’t get anything unless there’s been a complete transformation of how Iran interacts with the world.”
Vance concluded by arguing that the United States is already in a stronger strategic position regardless of whether Iran ultimately complies.
“If they don’t do any of these things, we don’t give them anything. They don’t receive anything. Their nuclear program is still destroyed. Their military is still destroyed. Their missile program and industrial base is still destroyed,” Vance stated.
It was a classic Vance performance, direct, combative, and unwilling to concede ground. For viewers watching at home, the debate highlighted a familiar divide in Washington. Critics see potential concessions to a hostile regime. Supporters see a framework that rewards compliance while maintaining pressure. On Tuesday night, Vance made it clear which side of that argument he believes is grounded in reality.
Leave a Comment