Points on Trump’s Letter to Congress Tonight

Dr. Fouad Izadi

1. Hours ago, Trump stated in a letter to Congress that U.S. military engagements with Iran have “ended.” Although he had previously argued that the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional, he effectively complied with it by notifying Congress at the start of the war and again at the end of the 60-day period.

2. Given the overwhelming opposition from Democratic lawmakers, along with a minority of Republicans, Trump understands that if he seeks congressional authorization to continue the war, he is unlikely to secure the necessary votes.

3. Under the War Powers Resolution, continuing the war requires an affirmative vote from Congress, and the president cannot use a veto in this matter.

4. It would have been preferable for Trump to obtain a supportive vote from Congress authorizing the continuation of the war, in order to signal to Iran that his threats carried legislative backing and to project greater strength. However, having concluded that he lacks such support—and recognizing that the law leaves him with a choice between terminating the war before 60 days or seeking authorization to extend it—Trump opted to declare the war over.

5. In practice, Trump’s letter also alludes to the possibility of initiating future operations. In effect, from his perspective, he has reset the 60-day clock; if he decides to launch new military action, a new clock would begin with the start of that operation.

6. This method of sidestepping the law, however, is likely to face opposition from most Democrats and some Republicans, as it is clear that this is essentially one continuous war against Iran.

Implications for Iran:

1. Since a naval blockade constitutes an act of war under both international law and U.S. law, the ceasefire has effectively been one-sided, with the United States violating it from the outset. Unfortunately, Trump appears to have used Iran’s goodwill and the negotiating atmosphere to claim in his letter that U.S. forces have not been under threat since the ceasefire.

2. Had there been even limited exchanges of fire in response to the naval blockade, Trump would have had no choice, upon reaching the 60-day mark, but to seek congressional authorization to continue the war—authorization that did not exist.

3. There should be a political and military response to what appears to be Trump’s attempt to reset the 60-day clock.

4. Taking into account the domestic constraints facing Trump does not mean placing hope in the U.S. Congress; rather, it means using all available tools to decisively defeat the opposing side.