In light of Iran’s largest missile attack on Israel in a single day, serious questions are surfacing about just how effective the Biden-Harris administration’s Middle East strategy really is. On Tuesday, Iran fired off a barrage of missiles targeting Israel, forcing millions into bomb shelters. This wasn’t some isolated attack, either—terrorists were also firing on civilians in Jaffa, leaving at least six dead and many others wounded. While Israel’s Iron Dome defense system did its job by intercepting the majority of the missiles, the sheer scale of the attack is a glaring reminder of the growing threat that Iran poses.
Critics are lining up to point fingers at the administration’s policy of easing sanctions on Iran and letting the regime pocket billions from oil sales. It’s not rocket science—those billions aren’t staying in Iran. They’re funding proxy militias like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis, which are only destabilizing the region further and fueling violence against Israel. But apparently, this administration thought it was a great idea to let Iran fatten up its coffers.
Republicans, as expected, aren’t having it. Rep. Peter Stauber from Minnesota didn’t mince words, reminding everyone that under Trump, Iran was broke and hurting. Now? Well, thanks to Biden’s policies, Iran is rolling in over $100 billion, and that cash is going straight to Hamas and Hezbollah. Even some Democrats are starting to distance themselves from the Biden-Harris Middle East approach. After the brutal Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, which left over 1,200 Israelis dead, it’s becoming harder to ignore the consequences. Senator Jacky Rosen, facing a tough re-election race, has expressed her concerns about the U.S. doing anything to support Iran. And Senator Joe Manchin, who isn’t even running for re-election, came out swinging, calling Biden’s $6 billion prisoner swap deal with Iran a “strategic mistake.”
Not to be outdone, former President Trump jumped into the fray after the latest missile strikes. He didn’t sugarcoat it, either, pointing out that this is exactly what happens when you lead with policies of weakness and appeasement. His words were a sharp rebuke of the Biden-Harris strategy, which seems to be more about placating Iran than addressing the real threat. Sure, Vice President Harris condemned Iran’s actions during a press briefing, but let’s not forget, her administration’s financial support for Tehran isn’t exactly ancient history. Funny how that didn’t come up.
Then there’s Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who just days before the missile attacks was calling on Israel to show “restraint” and aim for a ceasefire. You’d think by now this administration would realize that calling for Israel to pull its punches isn’t going to cut it when they’re facing terror groups armed to the teeth with Iranian money and missiles. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu isn’t sitting around waiting for the next barrage. He’s ramping up military efforts to dismantle these Iran-backed terror networks, no matter what the Biden administration has to say about it.
Trump-era officials, like former deputy national security advisor Victoria Coates, have been quick to highlight the dangers of Biden’s Middle East approach. Coates rightly pointed out that the administration has been tiptoeing around Iran for a year now, while Israel’s military actions have done more to degrade the capabilities of Hamas and Hezbollah than any U.S. diplomatic effort in recent memory. As the situation escalates, the American people have a choice to make in the next election. Do they want more of the same from Biden and Harris—appeasement and engagement with Iran—or will they choose a tougher stance, like the one taken by the Trump administration, which didn’t shy away from sanctions, targeted strikes, and pulling the plug on the disastrous Iran nuclear deal?
