UMVA has learned that Vice President J.D. Vance took to the podium at a White House press briefing on Thursday to defend a recent memorandum of understanding with Iran, signed just the day before.
Vance kicked off the briefing by highlighting some significant developments: 12.5 million barrels of oil had passed through the Strait of Hormuz, the highest volume since the start of the conflict, and oil prices had dropped to nearly pre-war levels. He also noted that gas prices had fallen below $4 a gallon for the first time since the conflict began.
According to information obtained by UMVA, Vance attributed these positive changes to the successful implementation of the agreement, stating that Iran had ceased firing on ships in the Strait of Hormuz and that the US military had allowed over a dozen ships to pass through the Naval blockade.
Vance then turned his attention to Iran's military capabilities, asserting that their nuclear program had been "completely destroyed" and their conventional military was still severely weakened. He emphasized that the next step in the president's peace plan depended on Iran's willingness to comply.
The Vice President addressed criticisms of the memorandum, which he claimed had been "misrepresented" by the media. He explained that the agreement was a "win-win situation" for the United States, as Iran would only benefit if they complied fully and changed their behavior.
Vance elaborated on the terms of the deal, stating that if Iran chose to change their behavior, they would have a transformative relationship with the Middle East. However, if they failed to comply, their military and nuclear program would remain destroyed.
When asked about Iran's recognition of the leverage held by the US and whether it would lead to a behavioral change, Vance frankly replied that he didn't know. He expressed hope that the weakened state of Iran would motivate them to change their behavior.
Vance cited the Gulf Arab states as supporters of the deal, contrasting it with the previous Iran Nuclear Deal. He emphasized that the current agreement was a fundamentally different perspective, coming from a position of strength, and that the Gulf Coast partners loved the deal because it made Iran weaker.
The key differences between the Obama-era deal and Trump's memorandum of understanding, according to Vance, lay in the negotiating standpoints and the fact that Iran's nuclear program was already destroyed. He highlighted that the Obama deal allowed the accumulation of stockpiled, weapons-grade material, while the new agreement led to the destruction of that stockpile.
Vance concluded by emphasizing that the US wasn't giving up any money to Iran and that any economic benefits or sanctions relief would only be granted if Iran performed as agreed.
