US promises to protect Gulf states' interests in Iran talks - Yahoo

The process to remove the rubble from Israeli bombardment has begun in south Lebanon (Joseph EID)

Leon Bruneau with AFP teams in Tehran, Dubai, Beirut and Jerusalem

Wed, June 24, 2026 at 6:10 PM EDT

4 min read

5.9kView comments

Secretary of State Marco Rubio promised Gulf allies of the United States on Wednesday that Washington would protect their interests as it seeks to hammer out a final settlement of the Middle East war in talks with Iran.

President Donald Trump met with NATO chief Mark Rutte at the White House, meanwhile, and said the United States was "doing great" in negotiations with Iran.

Trump also asked Congress on Wednesday for nearly $88 billion in supplemental funding, most of it for the Pentagon to cover the cost of the Iran war.

The proposal landed a day after Congress passed a largely symbolic resolution calling on Trump to end US hostilities with Iran unless lawmakers explicitly authorize military action.

Rubio is on a regional tour to reassure the Gulf states, which were targeted by Tehran's missiles and drones during the conflict and saw their crucial oil and gas shipments effectively cut off by an Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran has emerged emboldened from the war, vowing not to relinquish control of the vital waterway and going so far as to call its initial deal with Washington to stop the fighting "a declaration of America's defeat."

During a visit to Kuwait City, Rubio said Washington would be on the same page as Gulf states as it wrangles with Iran over a permanent settlement to the conflict.

"We're going to be completely aligned with our partners in the Gulf," he said, adding that the United States would "engage them on conversations about every decision that's made with regards to this negotiation."

Rubio is due to attend a Gulf Cooperation Council meeting in Bahrain on Thursday after sitting down with the leaders of Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates on Wednesday.

The initial US-Iran deal, which sets out a 60-day negotiating process aimed at reaching a long-term agreement, failed to address Gulf nations' long-standing concerns about Iran's missile program and regional proxies.

But Rubio insisted Washington was "not going to do anything that undermines the security of our allies."

- At odds on Hormuz -

More in World

Russia is still inching forward in eastern Ukraine, but experts say claims of progress are exaggerated

CNN

156

Oman, the longtime US ally on the other side of the Strait of Hormuz, is talking with Iran about imposing tolls

Yahoo Finance

824

Ukraine strikes knock out power in key city in Russian-occupied Crimea

BBC

Tehran, however, has already portrayed the deal as a victory.

Its top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said on Wednesday that the agreement, reached with the help of Pakistani mediation, was "the result of the resistance and authority of the brave Iranian nation."

"That is why the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding became a declaration of America's defeat," he said.

Rubio and Pakistan said technical talks between the United States and Iran were expected to resume in the coming days following a first round in Switzerland.

Rubio also insisted on Wednesday that the United States was committed to preserving the pre-war status quo of toll-free navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, which carries a substantial proportion of global oil and gas shipments.

"I know of no country on the planet that supports tolling or fees for the use of the strait," he said in Kuwait.

In Washington, Trump said imposing any fees on shipping would be "unacceptable."

Iran, however, has repeatedly said it intends to retain control over the strait, along with Oman, and charge what it calls maritime service fees for crossing it.

Qatar's prime minister, meanwhile, travelled to Oman to initiate talks on the strait between the Gulf states, Iraq and Iran, a diplomat told AFP.

The diplomat said Gulf countries would push for no-charge freedom of navigation, while Iran was expected to ask for an environmental and security service fee.

Speaking to AFP on condition of anonymity, another diplomat said separate talks on reconciliation between Gulf countries and Iran were expected to be held in Saudi Arabia, though they did not specify a date.

- 'Like the phoenix' -

Iran's Ghalibaf reiterated Wednesday that peace in Lebanon, which was drawn into the war when Tehran-backed Hezbollah launched attacks on Israel, was a fundamental pillar of reaching a definitive agreement with the United States.

"For us, the ceasefire in Lebanon has been and is as important as the ceasefire in Iran," he said.

The violence in Lebanon has ebbed in recent days but Hezbollah accused Israel of a "blatant" truce violation on Wednesday after an Israeli drone strike on a vehicle killed two people in southern Lebanon.

The Israeli military said it targeted "two armed Hezbollah terrorists" and vowed to "continue to operate to remove immediate threats."

Under US pressure, Lebanese officials began direct talks in April with Israel in Washington, with Lebanese authorities seeking to separate the negotiations from the US-Iran deal.

In the beachside Lebanese city of Tyre, 40-year-old Hussein Hassan was welcoming customers to his barbershop, despite one of its walls being cracked and its glass facade blown away in Israeli strikes.

Tyre residents "love life and work.

We shake off the dust and rise up again like the phoenix," he said.

bur/cl/ksb

View comments(5.9k)

Up next

298View comments

[AFP via Getty Images]

Sareen Habeshian & Bernd Debusmann Jr, White House reporter

Wed, June 24, 2026 at 11:22 AM EDT

5 min read

298View comments

The Republican-controlled US Senate has approved a measure demanding that President Donald Trump halt the war in Iran or seek congressional approval before continuing military action.

But while the resolution is largely symbolic, it could have political ramifications and represents a rare rebuke of Trump by lawmakers who have largely fallen behind the president since his return to office.

A handful of Republicans joined Democrats in Tuesday's 50-48 vote.

The same measure was passed by the US House of Representatives earlier this month.

It came as Republicans in Congress have expressed scepticism about a peace plan Trump agreed with Iran, and the unpopular conflict approaches its fifth month.

Trump criticised the resolution on Tuesday night, calling it "poorly timed and meaningless".

"So, I have Iran on the 'ropes,' ready to go down for the fall... and the U.S.

Senate decides to have a poorly timed and meaningless War Powers Act Vote," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

"These Senators have just made my job more difficult, but I will get it done, one way or the other, because I always get it done!"

UN says it will evacuate sailors stranded in Strait of Hormuz, as Rubio warns against tolls

The vote marks the first time that both chambers of Congress have approved a concurrent resolution instructing a president to end a military action since the War Powers Resolution of 1973 was enacted.

A concurrent resolution expresses the sentiment or will of Congress, as opposed to other forms of legislation that go to the president to be signed into law.

In 2019, Trump vetoed a joint resolution that called for the removal of armed forces from hostilities in the Yemeni civil war.

More in Politics

Melania Trump and Donald Trump repeatedly butted heads over White House renovations, new book says

Business Insider

389

Judge asks why Kennedy Center covering facade after Trump's name removed

AFP

627

Trump, Cassidy get testy at Senate GOP meeting; NATO chief defends US goals in Iran: Live updates

The Hill

1.4K

Middle East analyst Laura Blumenfeld called it "more of a slap on a wrist than a handcuff, because it has no legal binding".

But she told the BBC she thought what "it does reflect is the American people's sentiments".

In practice, the vote is unlikely to have little impact on the currently frozen conflict with Iran.

Experts believe he is likely to ignore it - as has every US president since it was enacted - and any legal challenges would likely produce no result.

"As a practical matter, it probably doesn't make much difference," said Michael Glennon, a professional law professor at Tufts University in Massachusetts.

"It's far more significant politically."

"You have both houses of Congress, which are under the control of the Republican Party, standing up to the president and saying no," Glennon added.

"That's almost unprecedented."

Trump, Glennon noted, has been "very effective" in exacting retribution against dissident Republicans who oppose him.

"This is a watershed event, politically, for that reason," he said.

Whether the vote represents a harbinger of more opposition to the president remains unclear, however.

"I wouldn't overreact to the significance of this vote," said Jonathan Entin, a constitutional law professor at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio.

"It's important... but I'm not sure that we should view it as a sign of consistent conflict, or additional conflict, with the president."

According to Entin, the upcoming November midterm elections in the US mean that while a handful of Republicans may wish to signal independence from Trump to bring in independent voters, many others will be hoping to avoid drawing his ire.

"There are constraints," he said.

"The president has overwhelming support among Republicans.

A candidate who pushes back too much might risk alienating strong Republican voters who think they aren't committed enough."

The same measure was passed earlier this month by the US House of Representatives, where four Republicans joined every Democrat to approve it in a 215-208 vote.

But a White House official told the BBC that with the ceasefire agreed on 7 April, there are no hostilities from which to withdraw American forces.

The official also said the measure only passed because two Republican senators were absent: Mitch McConnell and Dave McCormick.

Four Republican senators voted with Democrats in support of the resolution: Rand Paul, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Bill Cassidy.

Democratic Senator John Fetterman was the only member of his party to vote against it.

It was the latest sign of division among Trump's fellow Republicans ahead of the midterm elections in November, which will determine whether the party can hold on to its slender majorities in both chambers of Congress.

Some Republicans have resisted the president recently, including by rejecting his plans to create a $1.8 bn (£1.3bn) "anti-weaponisation" fund and approving Ukraine aid.

Tuesday's vote was the 10th time that Senate Democrats have forced a war powers vote since the start of the war.

It came the same day as the Pentagon asked Congress for some $80bn, most of which is to pay for the war with Iran.

Federal law requires congressional approval to continue military actions for more than 60 days.

The US-Israel strikes on Iran began on 28 February, although the Trump administration has argued April's ceasefire reset the clock.

The White House can also extend the deadline for another 30 days, citing national security.

Currently, the US and Iran have agreed to continue a ceasefire and are working towards an end of hostilities under a memorandum of understanding that was signed by the presidents of both countries last week.

Under that memo, Washington and Tehran have 60 days to negotiate a broader agreement on ending Iran's nuclear programme.

[BBC]

Follow the twists and turns of Trump's second term with North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher's weekly US Politics Unspun newsletter.

Readers in the UK can sign up here.

Those outside the UK can sign up here.

View comments(298)

Up next

203View comments

Photo Illustration by Eric Faison/The Daily Beast/Reuters

Ewan Palmer

Wed, June 24, 2026 at 7:58 AM EDT

2 min read

203View comments

Donald Trump defended his enemy in a morning Truth Social meltdown that came just hours after the 80-year-old president's last one.

In a typically deranged rant, posted at 7:37 a.m.

ET, Trump desperately defended Iran as talks to arrange a full peace deal to end the deeply unpopular Middle East conflict stall.

"Iran has informed the U.S. that, despite troublemaking Fake News reporting to the contrary, there are 'NO TOLLS, NO INSURANCE COSTS, & NO OTHER CHARGES OF ANY KIND BEING SOUGHT OR RECEIVED BY IRAN ON SHIPS TRAVELING THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ.

If this is false information, negotiations would end, immediately," Trump posted.

"Additionally, no money has been given to Iran, or released from their money to them, by the U.S.

We will be releasing some of their money, that is totally controlled by us, to our Farmers and Ranchers, for the purchase of Corn, Wheat, Soybeans, and more.

Food is desperately needed in Iran, and we will be purchasing it for them exclusively from the United States."

The 7:37 a.m. post wasn’t even the first one that Donald Trump had sent on Wednesday morning / Truth Social/Donald Trump

Trump woke up and began ranting about the Iran talks after seemingly getting less than five hours of sleep. At 2:38 a.m., the president, who has a habit of falling asleep in public, posted: "America the Beautiful will NEVER be a Communist Country!!!"

The Truth Social post appeared to refer to Democratic socialist and progressive candidates endorsed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who won their primary races on Tuesday.

The issue of whether Iran will impose tolls on ships traveling through ⁠the Strait of Hormuz has threatened to hinder Trump's peace talks. / Elizabeth Frantz/REUTERS

It is unclear if Iran has actually backed away from plans to introduce toll fees in the Strait of Hormuz as part of negotiations to reopen the vital shipping route.

Tehran has previously dismissed suggestions coming from the Trump administration as the talks continue.

This includes Vice President JD Vance's claim on Monday that Iran has agreed to invite International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors back into the country.

Vance, who is part of the U.S. delegation trying to broker a peace deal, made the claim during a press conference following the first round of negotiations in Switzerland.

Trump has faced widespread criticism, including from his own party, over a U.S. concession-filled memorandum of understanding he signed, which aims to end the war with Iran.

More in World

China’s newest aircraft carrier sails through the Taiwan Strait

Associated Press

Ray Dalio just finished a 10-day trip to China. He says global leaders know America ‘doesn’t have what it takes to fight to maintain its empire’

Fortune

141

US revokes 20,000 visas for Mexican truckers as cabotage crackdown expands

FreightWaves

This includes demanding that Iran allow for the "safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge for 60 days," despite the passageway being free to use before the war started.

In return, U.S. would end its naval blockade against Iran, lift U.S. imposed sanctions, make "frozen or restricted funds and assets" available to Tehran, and ensure a $300 billion fund for the reconstruction of the Middle Eastern country.

View comments(203)

Up next

363View comments

Kevin Lamarque / REUTERS

William Vaillancourt

Wed, June 24, 2026 at 12:01 AM EDT

2 min read

363View comments

Karoline Leavitt shared a poll showing "broad support" for parts of Donald Trump's Iran peace deal—but failed to mention that a vast majority thought the deal could fall apart anyway.

The White House press secretary, 28, on Tuesday shared on X a Breitbart link to an Economist/YouGov poll conducted last week.

"Poll: Broad Support for Key Objectives in Trump's Peace Deal with Iran," Leavitt wrote.

Leavitt shared a poll touting

As part of the memorandum of understanding with Iran, there would be a ceasefire, Iran would reopen the Straight of Hormuz, and the country would not "procure or develop nuclear weapons."

Additionally, the U.S. would lift sanctions against Iran while creating a $300 billion reconstruction investment fund for Iran.

The "broad support" Leavitt and Breitbart were referencing appears to be the 69 percent of respondents who said they supported reopening the Strait of Hormuz with "toll-free commercial passage" for 60 days.

The same percentage agreed that Iran should promise not to develop nuclear weapons.

But when asked about the deal as a whole, poll respondents were less firmly on Trump's side.

Less than one-third (32 percent) supported the deal, while 24 percent opposed it and 44 percent were unsure.

Additionally, a whopping 81 percent of the poll's 1,679 respondents said it was either "very" or "somewhat" likely that the deal would fall apart and war would resume.

Among self-described "MAGA" supporters, that number was still quite high (71 percent), and among Republicans, it was even higher: 75 percent.

That point was highlighted by CBS News' Kathryn Watson.

The U.S. and Iran are negotiating a proposed deal to end Donald Trump’s deeply unpopular Middle East conflict. / Evelyn Hockstein / REUTERS

Furthermore, only slightly more Americans in the poll felt that the U.S. had "won" the war: 25 percent, compared with 22 percent who chose Iran.

A considerable 41 percent said neither won.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Negotiations to end the war within 60 days began last weekend in Switzerland.

The U.S. delegation is led by Vice President JD Vance, who got off to a rocky start by being forced to deny he had been snubbed by Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi.

View comments(363)

Up next

358View comments

Kylie Cooper / Kylie Cooper/REUTERS

Erkki Forster

Tue, June 23, 2026 at 5:44 PM EDT

3 min read

358View comments

House Speaker Mike Johnson resorted to verbal gymnastics as he was put on the spot over President Donald Trump's extraordinary concessions in his deal with Iran.

Johnson was long a critic of President Barack Obama's 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and applauded Trump for abandoning the deal and imposing sanctions on the country during his first term in 2018.

But the Republican leader has found himself in a bind after Trump, desperate to end his war with Iran, struck a peace deal with the country's regime that has lifted sanctions on Iranian oil for the first time in decades and paves the way for the eventual removal of all sanctions.

In 2020, Johnson co-authored a 120-page document as chairman of a Republican task force that blasted Obama’s deal and declared that sanctions on Iran should not be lifted “without approval from the House and Senate.” / Kylie Cooper/REUTERS

As he left his office in the Capitol on Tuesday, Johnson ran headfirst into an uncomfortable question from CNN's Chief Congressional Correspondent Manu Raju: "You were very critical of sanction relief under the JCPOA.

They're easing oil sanctions, and other sanctions will be eased.

Do you have similar concerns?"

Johnson, 54, repeatedly swerved around the question as he retreated into generalities.

"Look, there's a lot of moving parts right now," the Louisiana congressman said.

"It is something the Trump administration is working around the clock on.

I trust that they're going to come to a lasting solution on that.

The world desperately needs it, and we do as well."

Raju posted the exchange on his personal X account.

Johnson added that he was "heartened to see that gas prices are coming down for the American consumer, and the Strait is reopened," before adding, "The details are still being negotiated."

Raju shot back, "What about sanctions—they've already announced that with oil sanctions," as he tried again to draw out an answer.

"I have always been a supporter of strong sanctions against Iran," Johnson said, before repeating, "There's a lot of moving parts to this."

"I got enough to do to manage the House over here," he added.

"I'm not going to tell the administration how to negotiate."

The House speaker, who seldom dares to break with the president, never answered Raju’s initial question. / Evan Vucci/REUTERS

"You told the Obama administration," Raju could be heard telling Johnson as the House speaker took a question from a different reporter.

Trump's agreement with Iran concedes that the U.S. would terminate "all types of sanctions" against Iran, including primary and secondary ones, once a final deal is reached after the 60-day negotiation period.

In the meantime, the U.S.

Treasury has already issued waivers for Iran to export crude oil and other petroleum products.

The deal also says that the U.S. would work with regional partners to develop a plan for at least $300 billion for the "reconstruction and economic development" of Iran.

More in Politics

Trump set to launch America250 festivities with a rally on the National Mall

BBC

2.2K

Only one US state pays teachers an average of 6 figures. See how much teachers make in every state.

Business Insider

SCOTUS Unanimously Ruled That the Second Amendment Trumps Anti-Drug Sentiment

Reason.com

1.2K

In 2020, Johnson co-authored a 120-page document as chairman of a Republican task force that blasted Obama's 2015 Iran deal and declared that sanctions should not be lifted "without approval from the House and Senate" and recommended further sanctions on the country.

Meanwhile, although Iran has temporarily lifted its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, the deal states that Iran would engage in talks with Oman to decide how the Strait will be managed in the future, falling well short of a firm pledge not to interfere with the vital waterway, which had been open and uncontested before Trump launched his war in February.

View comments(358)

Up next

103View comments

U.S.

Vice President JD Vance before boarding Air Force Two at Emmen Military Air Base, Emmen, Switzerland, Monday, June 22, 2026, after the U.S. and Iran held high-level talks at the Lake Lucerne Summit. (Nathan Howard/Pool Photo via AP)

(Nathan Howard/Pool Reuters via AP)

President Donald Trump speaks at a Mack Trucks facility, Tuesday, June 23, 2026, in Macungie, Pa. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

(AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

U.S.

(Nathan Howard/Pool Reuters via AP)

APTOPIX Switzerland Iran US Negotiations

1 of 3

U.S.

(Nathan Howard/Pool Reuters via AP)More

PAUL WISEMAN

Updated Tue, June 23, 2026 at 5:14 PM EDT

4 min read

103View comments

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S.

President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance say their interim deal to end the war with Iran will deliver a financial windfall to American farmers.

But the Iranians deny it.

And in the absence of more details, sanctions experts are flummoxed over exactly how billions of dollars' worth of Iranian assets would make their way to the American heartland from the escrow accounts where they've been locked for years by U.S. sanctions.

A tentative agreement reached last week would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world's oil and natural gas once passed, and allow Iran to start selling its oil freely again during a 60-day period when the two countries will continue negotiating key issues.

The memorandum of understanding also promised to unfreeze Iranian assets.

Trump's deal has come under fire for failing to address the reasons the president cited for going to war with Iran on Feb. 28, including curbing Tehran's nuclear ambitions, its missile program and its support for militant groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.

Lashing back at critics Tuesday on his Truth Social media platform, Trump said U.S. farmers would get a payday: The U.S.

Treasury Department, he wrote, would release the Iranian assets "into escrow, controlled by the U.S.A., and will be used for the purchase of food and medical supplies, exclusively from the United States, including Corn, Wheat, and Soybeans from our great American farmers.

These are things that are desperately needed by Iran.''

Vance, who spoke about the proposal after high-level talks in Switzerland, and Trump say that any frozen funds and assets held outside of Iran will be used to buy U.S. crops.

But the Iranians deny that's part of the deal.

A spokesperson for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Esmail Baghaei, said any agricultural purchases would be based on "prices and quality,'' not terms dictated by Washington.

"It is interesting that the philosophy and goal of the war, which was the destruction of the Iranian civilization and the collapse of Iran, has become enriching American farmers," Baghaei said.

Iran's ambassador in Geneva, Ali Bahreini, rejected Vance's contention that the U.S. and Qatar would dictate how Iran uses unfrozen funds.

"Iran is the only country who decides what to do with those assets," he told reporters.

A U.S. official dismissed the contradiction, asserting that Iranian leaders were speaking to their domestic audience.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record.

Joseph Glauber, a research fellow emeritus at the International Food Policy Research Institute, said Iran was unlikely to abandon its other trade partners on food.

Iran's major suppliers include Brazil, India, Turkey, the European Union, Canada, Australia and Argentina, he said.

Trump's demand to buy from the U.S. would "create some hard feelings with some of our competitors."

More in World

China's import of custard apples is sparking fears in Taiwan

BBC

Ukraine’s latest long-range strikes on Russia hit a major natural gas plant and satellite centers

Associated Press

444

Europe is debating the terms of its industrial surrender

Semafor

Under previous sanctions, the U.S. has required that money foreign countries spend on imports from Iran — such as South Korean purchases of oil and Iraqi purchases of Iranian electricity — be locked in escrow accounts and typically released only if the Treasury approves and if the proceeds go toward "non-sanctionable'' items such as food and medicine.

On Monday, the [U.S.

Treasury approved the sale](https://ofac.treasury.gov/media/936206/download?inline) of Iranian oil, petrochemicals and petroleum products through Aug. 21.

It did not mention any escrow accounts.

Richard Goldberg of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who coordinated efforts to put diplomatic pressure on Iran in the first Trump administration, said in a post on X that he would welcome "a clarification that Iran is actually restricted to only buying U.S. agricultural products."

Richard Nephew, senior research scholar at Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy, said it's unclear what the new U.S.-Iran agreement actually means for releasing restricted Iranian assets.

Could the U.S. require that the assets be used to buy American farm products?

"Well, we can try!'' Nephew, who helped design Iran sanctions in the Obama and Biden administrations, said by email.

"All you really need to do is to tell a foreign bank that they can move the money but only to a U.S. bank to buy soybeans or whatever."

Banks do not have to comply, he said.

If they refuse, the U.S. could sanction them as well.

But it's rare for the U.S. to conduct itself that way, he added, "in part because we don't usually like to give the impression that we treat national security issues as a cash grab."

\\\_

Associated Press writers Josh Boak and Michelle L.

Price in Washington contributed to this report.

View comments(103)

US promises to protect Gulf states' interests in Iran talks - Yahoo

More in World

More in Politics

More in World

More in Politics

APTOPIX Switzerland Iran US Negotiations

More in World

Recommended articles