JD Vance responds to cousin who called him and Trump ‘Putin's useful idiots'

Vice President JD Vance has responded to the criticism levied by his cousin Nate Vance, who volunteered in Ukraine and called the VP and President Donald Trump Russian President Vladimir Putin 's 'useful idiots.'
'I love my cousin Nate, and never spoke publicly about his service in Ukraine because I didn't want to endanger his life more than it already was,' Vance said in a statement, according to The Daily Beast.
Nate Vance spent three years on the front lines fighting for Ukraine against the Russian invasion that began in February 2022.
'As far as his criticisms, I have no interest in arguing with him in public, but I do feel the need to address one issue in particular: his failed effort to contact me,' the vice president added, noting that his cousin could have contacted his mother, father, or sister, adding that they're 'regularly' in touch.
'I always considered Nate the toughest guy I knew, and no matter what he says about me, my affection for him remains. I'm always happy to talk to him,' said Vance.
In his Sunday interview with the French newspaper Le Figaro, Nate Vance said he had tried to get in touch with the vice president through his office to share his views following the Oval Office blow-up between the VP, Trump, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Nate Vance called the meeting an 'ambush of absolute dishonesty.'
Nate Vance subsequently told CNN on Monday that he was unsure whether JD Vance had received his message at all.
'But I did reach out,' Nate Vance told CNN. 'Regardless of whether or not I reached out or not, I mean, he definitely knew I was there and at no point tried to make contact, and there were ways to do that.'
The Texan also told the BBC he views himself as 'pretty Republican.' He criticized his cousin in numerous interviews this week.
'Regardless of the situation, there's a certain level of decorum that should be reached,' Nate Vance told CNN on Monday.
'When you do that and you publicly, you know, kind of ridicule someone in public that they have to almost defend themselves, it was just really disappointing to see it,' he added, seemingly in reference to the Oval Office meeting where the vice president insisted to Zelensky that he show more gratitude for U.S. aid to Ukraine. 'For me, I disagreed with that tact.'
During the now-infamous Oval Office meeting, the VP harshly criticized Zelensky in front of the TV cameras, calling him ungrateful and disrespectful.
Nate Vance told Le Figaro the vice president is 'intelligent' and a 'good guy,' but that he's playing politics when it comes to aid to Ukraine.
The vice president has long been critical of U.S. aid to Ukraine, even during his short stint as an Ohio senator.
'When he criticized aid to Ukraine, I told myself that it was because he had to please a certain electorate, that it was the game of politics,' Nate Vance told Le Figaro. 'But what they did to Zelensky was an ambush of absolute bad faith.'
'Donald Trump and my cousin clearly believe they can placate Vladimir Putin,' he added. 'They are wrong. The Russians are not about to forget our support for Ukraine. We are Vladimir Putin's useful idiots.'
He added that he was 'disappointed' by the Oval Office showdown.
'I was disappointed. When JD justifies his distrust of Zelensky by the 'reports' he has seen, I thought I was going to choke,' said Nate Vance.
'His own cousin was on the front lines,' he added. 'I could have told him the truth, without pretense, without personal interest. He never tried to find out more.'
Nate Vance returned home to the U.S. in January, not long before his cousin and Trump took office, noting that he couldn't risk being captured. The Texan and former U.S. Marine said he volunteered for the Da Vinci Wolves First Motorized Battalion from 2022 until January.
'Being your family doesn't mean I'm going to accept you killing my comrades,' he told the French paper.
This comes as Ukraine has agreed to a U.S. proposal for an immediate ceasefire, which will go into effect for 30 days if Russia agrees to the terms, a joint statement between the U.S. and Ukrainian governments revealed. The proposal followed eight hours of negotiations in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, between U.S. and Ukrainian delegations.
'a 30-day full interim ceasefire, not only stopping missile, drone, and bomb attacks, not only in the Black Sea, but also along the entire front line. Ukraine is ready to accept this proposal — we see it as a positive step and are ready to take it. Now, it is up to the United States to convince Russia to do the same.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Scottish Sun

an hour ago

• Scottish Sun

US warns it WILL strike again and world ‘should listen to Trump' as Iran leaders jet to meet Putin after nuke bomb blitz

'WE WILL DEFEND' US warns it WILL strike again and world 'should listen to Trump' as Iran leaders jet to meet Putin after nuke bomb blitz THE US has warned it will strike again and that the world "should listen to Trump" after unleashing an unprecedented blitz on three nuclear facilities. It comes imminently after the Iranian foreign minister revealed he is to meet with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and warned the West of "unprecedented danger". 5 Iranian worshippers burn the flags of the US and Israel on Friday 5 United States President Donald J Trump addresses the nation Credit: AP 5 Russia's President Vladimir Putin shakes hands with Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi during a meeting at the Kremlin in April Credit: AFP 5 B-2 Spirit drops a GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bomb (stock image) 5 US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said Operation Midnight Hammer was 'an incredible and overwhelming success' that took months and weeks of planning. He added Trump has been clear that "any retaliation by Iran" against the US would be "met with force far greater" than what was seen on Saturday night. Hegseth said: 'Iran would be smart to heed those words. He's said it before, and he means it.' The Defence Secretary went on to praise the US leader, calling it "bold and brilliant, showing the world that American deterrence is back". He urged: "When this President speaks, the world should listen." Iran's foreign minister Abbas Arghchi has said he is going to Russia today to meet mad leader Putin. He revealed: 'I'm going to Moscow this afternoon, and I have a meeting with President Putin tomorrow morning.' Arghchi called Moscow a 'friend of Iran,' adding 'we always consult with each other'. Fears loom that the conflict could spiral into a world war, with Putin puppet Dmitry Medvedev making a veiled threat to supply Iran with nuclear weapons. He said: "A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their nuclear weapons." After declaring the US strikes as being a success, Trump warned that further action could be taken if Tehran doesn't agree to an adequate peace deal. He said in a nationally televised speech at the White House: "Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier." "There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days." 'Remember there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. 'But if peace does not come quickly we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. 'Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes. There's no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight." And shortly after speaking on-camera, he posted to Truth Social: "This cannot continue. There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. "Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. "But if peace does not come quickly we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill." Meanwhile Iran's foreign minister Abbas Arghchi dubbed the strikes "outrageous and will have everlasting consequences". He also called the military action "a grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations". Stay up to date with the latest on Israel vs Iran with The Sun's live blog below...

NBC News

3 hours ago

• NBC News

Meet the Press — June 22, 2025

KRISTEN WELKER: This Sunday: War with Iran. President Trump joins Israel's fight, ordering strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites. PRES. DONALD TRUMP: Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. KRISTEN WELKER: Will Iran retaliate? And will the U.S. get dragged into a longer war in the Middle East? PRES. DONALD TRUMP: There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. KRISTEN WELKER: My guests this morning: Vice President JD Vance, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona. Joining me for insight and analysis are: NBC News Chief Washington Correspondent Andrea Mitchell; Jonathan Martin of Politico; Ashley Etienne, former communications director to Vice President Harris; and Lanhee Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution. Welcome to Sunday and a special edition of Meet the Press. ANNOUNCER: From NBC News in Washington, the longest-running show in television history, this is a special edition of Meet the Press with Kristen Welker. KRISTEN WELKER: Good Sunday morning. In one of the most consequential decisions of his presidency, President Trump ordered U.S. strikes on three nuclear sites inside Iran. American B-2 stealth bombers carrying powerful 30,000-pound bunker buster bombs targeted Iran's major uranium enrichment sites buried deep underground. [START TAPE] PRES. DONALD TRUMP: Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror. Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: After campaigning on a policy of 'America first' and arguing against foreign conflicts, the U.S. has now joined Israel's war with Iran, with President Trump warning Iran that more strikes could be next. [START TAPE] PRES. DONALD TRUMP: There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes. There's no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight, not even close. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanking President Trump for his decisive action. [START TAPE] ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: President Trump and I often say 'peace through strength.' First comes strength. Then comes peace. And tonight President Trump and the United States acted with a lot of strength. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: Overnight, many Republicans praised President Trump's decision, but Democrats and some Republicans said the president had acted without congressional approval, raising concerns. The questions now: What happens next? Could this be the beginning of a longer and more dangerous war in the mideast? And of immediate concern: when and how will Iran retaliate? With 40,000 American troops stationed in the Mideast, the Pentagon is on high alert. Iran's foreign minister responding this morning saying the U.S. and Israel have 'blown up' the chance of diplomacy. In an exclusive interview with NBC News before the strikes, he warned Iran would respond to a U.S. attack. [START TAPE] ANDREA MITCHELL: Would Iran retaliate against U.S. targets and U.S. forces in the region or elsewhere? ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTER ABBAS ARAGHCHI: Well, when there is a war, both sides attack each other. That's quite understandable. And self-defense is a legitimate right of every country. Because if the U.S. joins Israel in these attacks, we will do the same. We actually retaliate as a form of self-defense. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: And joining me now is Vice President JD Vance. Vice President Vance, welcome back to Meet the Press. VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Thank you Kristen. Great to be with you. KRISTEN WELKER: Thank you for being here on a monumental Sunday. My first question, Mr. Vice President: Is the United States now at war with Iran? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: No, Kristen, we're not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear program. And let me just say, Kristen, that we're incredibly grateful and proud of the American Air Force pilots who did an incredible job last night. The operation was really extraordinary. These guys flew from Missouri. They didn't land a single time. They dropped 30,000-pound bombs on a target the size of a washing machine and then got back home safely without ever landing in the Middle East or ever stopping other than to briefly refuel. And, of course, they did that in the air. So, it's really an incredible operation, a testament to the power of the American military, and I think what – shows what can happen when you have that great American military in the hands of capable presidential leadership. What we did is we destroyed the Iranian nuclear program. I think we set that program back substantially, and we did it without endangering the lives of the American pilots. That's an incredible thing, and I think we all should be proud – whatever, whatever our politics, we should be proud of what these guys accomplished: a very, very high-impact mission under a lot of pressure. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Vice President, let's talk about what happens next. President Trump posted on social media, quote, "Any retaliation by Iran will be met with force greater than what was witnessed tonight." If Iran retaliates against the U.S., as it is threatening, what will the United States' response be? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, Kristen, that's ultimately going to be the president's decision. But what we said to the Iranians is we do not want war with Iran; we actually want peace. But we want peace in the context of them not having a nuclear weapons program, and that's exactly what the president accomplished last night. I really think there are two big questions for the Iranians here: Are they going to attack American troops or are they going to continue with their nuclear weapons program? And if they leave American troops out of it and they decide to give up their nuclear weapons program once and for all, then I think the president has been very clear. We can have a good relationship with the Iranians. We can have a peaceful situation in that region of the world. We have to step back a little bit, Kristen, and remind ourselves that we negotiated aggressively with the Iranians to try to find a peaceful settlement to this conflict. It was only when the president decided that the Iranians were not negotiating in good faith that he took this action. He didn't take it lightly, but I actually think it provides an opportunity to reset this relationship, reset these negotiations and get us in a place where Iran can decide not to be a threat to its neighbors, not to be a threat to the United States. And if they're willing to do that, the United States is all ears. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, let's talk about the possibility of negotiations. I mean, the Iranian foreign minister responded to the strikes this morning, saying Israel and the U.S. have, quote, "blown up diplomacy." Mr. Vice President, is there any real hope for diplomacy, or is diplomacy dead at this point? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, I think the foreign minister is exactly wrong. We didn't blow up diplomacy. We only took this action, Kristen, when it was clear— as the president said — that the Iranians were tapping us along. I think it's important for the American people to appreciate here that if you go back to March of this year, we had the entire administration engaged in this diplomatic effort. And frankly, in March of this year, we had some optimism. How did we get from there to now? And the answer is we felt very strongly that the Iranians were stonewalling us, they weren't taking this seriously, they were trying to draw this process out as long as possible so that they could rebuild their nuclear weapons program without the threat of American action. We had a limited window in which we could take out this Fordo nuclear facility in particular. The president decided to take it. But we didn't blow up the diplomacy. The diplomacy never was given a real chance by the Iranians. And our hope, Kristen, as the president said repeatedly, is that this maybe can reset here. The Iranians have a choice: they can go down the path of peace, or they can go down the path of this ridiculous brinkmanship, of funding terrorism, of trying to build a nuclear weapon. And that's just not something the United States can accept. I want to say something, Kristen, just to the Iranian leadership. Look, they have tried to build a nuclear weapons program. That program is now destroyed. They tried to build a conventional missile program to attack neighbors in the region. That missile program has shown to be a failure. They have funded terrorism aggressively in the region. And now, most of their terrorism proxies are destroyed. The Iranians are clearly not very good at war. Perhaps they should follow President Trump's lead and give peace a chance. If they're serious about it, I guarantee you the president of the United States is too. KRISTEN WELKER: So, has the administration received any messages from the Iranians since the attack overnight? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, Kristen, I think as we sit here it's been about 12 hours since what happened last night. We have received some indirect messages from the Iranians. And it's possible, of course, that some of my colleagues in the administration received something early this morning, and I haven't heard about it. But, look, our expectation is we're going to learn a lot about what the Iranians want to do, how they want to proceed over the next 24 hours. Again, I just can't be clear enough here -- The president has said he wants now to engage in a diplomatic process. But if the Iranians are not going to play ball here, they didn't leave us many options as it pertains to last night, and they won't leave us many options in the future. KRISTEN WELKER: If Iran disrupts shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, which of course, handles about a quarter of the world's oil trade, would that be a red line for the United States, Mr. Vice President? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, Kristen, I think our biggest red line is the Iranian nuclear weapons program. That is really what the president has said we need to get rid of. Obviously-- KRISTEN WELKER: But what about the Strait of Hormuz-- VICE PRES. JD VANCE: --he took steps towards doing that last night. Well, I think that would be suicidal, Kristen, for the Iranians themselves. Their entire economy runs through the Strait of Hormuz. If they want to destroy their own economy and cause disruptions in the world, I think that would be their decision. But why would they do that? I don't think it makes any sense. I don't think that it makes sense for them or for anybody else. What would make sense is for them to come to the negotiating table, to actually give up their nuclear weapons program over the long term. And, again, if they're willing to do that, they're going to find a willing partner in the United States of America. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Vice President, when did President Trump exactly make this decision, and did he coordinate with Israel? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: The president, honestly, Kristen, I don't know that any of us knew exactly when the president made the decision except for the president himself. But if you back up a little bit, we engaged in this diplomatic process. I think that he decided probably by mid-May that this process was not going anywhere, and so he decided to issue some private ultimatums to the Iranians. And then eventually, of course, we decided to destroy the Fordo nuclear facility and some of these other facilities ourselves. I think one of the things that you saw from the president's team—and I really am proud of all of our guys in the senior team—is an operation of this magnitude, multiple B-2s, 14 30,000-pound bombs, and even an hour after the attack, the entire media, some of our enemies all over the world, they had no idea this was happening. And that's because you had a coherent team that was aligned behind the president's vision. There weren't any leaks. I think that made our troops safer as they carried out this mission. And so it's really a testament to the entire team that we were able to do something like this, at this scale, without anybody noticing it. KRISTEN WELKER: But, Mr. Vice President, if I can just try again: Can you give me a specific date when President Trump said 'go'? Was it Thursday? Was it yesterday, before the B-2s left? When exactly did President Trump give that green light, that 'go'? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, the final decision, Kristen, of course, is made right before. And I'm talking about minutes— KRISTEN WELKER: When was that? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: —before the bombs were dropped. And of course, well, that was last night. And the president made very clear that the purpose here is to eliminate the Iranian nuclear program. So I think that he, himself, over time decided this was necessary. But of course he had the ability to call off this attack until the very last minute. He obviously decided to proceed. And I think that we did great things for the American people because of it. KRISTEN WELKER: You know, the president says the nuclear enrichment sites were, quote, "completely and totally obliterated." There is some question about that though this morning. Do you have 100% confidence that Iran's nuclear sites were totally destroyed? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, Kristen, I'm not going to get into sensitive intelligence about what we've seen on the ground there in Iran. But we've seen a lot, and I feel very confident, that we've substantially delayed their development of a nuclear weapon. And that was the goal of this attack. That's why it was a success. And of course what happens next, again, Kristen, is up to the Iranians. KRISTEN WELKER: Substantially delayed by years? What does "substantially" mean— VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, again, Kristen, I'm not going to get into sensitive intelligence here. But I think that we have really pushed their program back by a very long time. I think that it's going to be many, many years before the Iranians are able to develop a nuclear weapon. But, again, our goal is that they're never able to develop a nuclear weapons program. And that is a conversation that we're going to have with the Iranians and also with our allies in the region. KRISTEN WELKER: So Iran, again, has said that it would retaliate if the U.S. got involved. There are some 40,000 American troops in the Middle East. The Pentagon is on high alert. Is the U.S. bracing for Iran to target American troops in the region? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: We're, of course, Kristen, doing everything that we can to keep our people safe. I think that we're prepared in the event that the Iranians do retaliate. But my message to the Iranians is it would be the stupidest thing in the world if they did. If you look at what happened last night, we had an incredibly targeted, precise, surgical strike on the nuclear facilities that are the target of the American operation. Our national interest is for Iran to not get a nuclear weapon. Our strikes last night facilitated that national objective. If the Iranians were to enlarge this by attacking American troops, I think that would be a catastrophic mistake. And as the president said last night, the Iranians would be met with then overwhelming force beyond that. So, this is a very delicate moment, Kristen. I don't want to pretend that it's not. But I think the Iranians, if they're smart, they're going to have to look in the mirror and say, "Hey, maybe we're not so good at this war thing. Let's give peace a chance. Let's drop our nuclear weapons program and start to make some smarter decisions." We're of course hoping that's exactly what the Iranians do. KRISTEN WELKER: And I have a number of more questions, so I want to keep moving. How concerned is the administration — VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Sure. KRISTEN WELKER: — that Iran or Iranian proxies could carry out a terrorist attack inside the United States? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, unfortunately, Kristen, we know that a lot of people who we don't have full accounting of were let in over the last four years under the Biden administration. We know that some of those people were on terrorism watch lists. We feel very confident in our FBI and law enforcement that we're on top of the situation. But, yeah, we're looking at this very closely. We're doing everything that we can to keep our people safe. And this is one of the reasons why border security is national security — is if you let a bunch of crazy people into your country, those crazy people can eventually take action. We're going to do everything that we can to make sure that doesn't happen and to keep Americans safe. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Vice President, can you rule out that getting involved in this conflict won't eventually lead to U.S. boots on the ground? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, the president's been very clear, Kristen. We have no interest in a protracted conflict. We have no interest in boots on the ground. The president has actually been one of the fiercest critics of 25 years of failed foreign policy in the Middle East, which is why he did what he did: a very precise, a very surgical strike tailored to an American national interest. And that national interest is Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. It would be a disaster for us and for our allies in the region. So I don't fear that this is going to become a protracted conflict because I think that we have a president who knows what's in America's interest and is willing to do the things necessary to accomplish that interest. KRISTEN WELKER: As you know, after an Iranian missile struck a hospital in Israel this week, Israel's defense minister said the Ayatollah, quote, "can no longer be allowed to exist." Does the United States support Israel killing Iran's leader? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, look, that's up to the Israelis, but our view has been very clear that we don't want a regime change. We do not want to protract this or build this out any more than it's already been built out. We want to end their nuclear program, and then we want to talk to the Iranians about a long-term settlement here. We believe very strongly that there are two pathways: there's a pathway where Iran continues to fund terrorism, continues to try to build a nuclear program, attacks American troops — that's the bad pathway for Iran, and it will be met with overwhelming force. There's another pathway— KRISTEN WELKER: But— VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: — on the table here. There's a pathway where Iran integrates itself into the international community, stops funding terrorism and stops trying to pursue a nuclear weapon. This is a reset. This is an opportunity for the Iranians to take the smart path. We certainly hope that they will. KRISTEN WELKER: Couple more questions, and we're almost out of time. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi— VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Sure. KRISTEN WELKER: — Gabbard said in March that, quote, "Iran is not building a nuclear weapon." Democratic Senator Mark Warner, the vice chair of the Intelligence Committee, said he was briefed on Monday that, quote, "The intelligence hasn't changed." So, why launch this strike now? Has the intelligence changed, Mr. Vice President? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, a couple things about that, Kristen. So what Tulsi said back in March is that Iran was producing highly enriched uranium that was only consistent with them wanting to build a nuclear weapon. There's of course an open question about whether they were weeks away, whether they were months away. But they were way too close to a nuclear weapon for the comfort of the president of the United States, which is why he took this action. Now, there's another element here too, Kristen, which is that we had a narrow window of opportunity. We might not have been able to carry out this attack six months down the road. And so when you recognize on the one hand, the Iranians are trying to get a nuclear weapon, and on the other hand, we have a narrow window in which we can set that program back a very long time, it would have been irresponsible I think for the president not to take the action that he did, which is why Fordo was destroyed last night. KRISTEN WELKER: And just to be very clear, did the president say "go" based on U.S. intelligence or Israeli intelligence? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, of course, we share intelligence with a lot of agencies: British, Israeli and so forth. But it was our intelligence that motivated us to act. And I think on the intelligence, Kristen, the thing that I would really emphasize is the way in which the Iranians seemed to be stonewalling us. That was not, by the way, our consensus back in March of this year. We saw the Iranians making some concessions. We thought the conversations were actually productive. By mid-May, everybody in our intelligence community, in the president's senior team looked at ourselves and said, "The Iranians are not being serious. They're no longer making concessions. They're no longer actually responding to some of the offers that we're making." If you believe, as we did, that the Iranians are rushing towards a nuclear weapons program while simultaneously refusing to negotiate, how could we do anything but take serious action against this program? KRISTEN WELKER: Do you and President Trump trust the U.S. intelligence community and its assessment? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Oh, of course we trust our intelligence community, but we also trust our instincts. And most importantly, we trust what the intelligence was telling us about the Iranians stonewalling the negotiation. I think that is really the hidden story here and something the media has got to report a little bit more here, is that the Iranians stopped negotiating in good was the real catalyst, I think, to what the president ultimately decided to do. If we were having a productive negotiation, I think that this could have gone in a much different pathway. Unfortunately, the Iranians decided to stonewall us, and we saw the consequences of that last night. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Vice President, very quickly, as you know, this is dividing lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Many Republicans supportive, but Congressman Thomas Massie saying this is unconstitutional; Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez saying it's grounds for impeachment, saying the president should have gotten congressional approval first. What do you say to members of Congress who say it was unconstitutional for the president to act unilaterally? VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Well, I'd say two things, Kristen. And this is very important. First of all, the president has clear authority to act to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. And the worst weapon of mass destruction of them all is nuclear. The idea that this was outside of presidential authority, I think any real serious legal person would tell you that's not true. And the second thing is, Kristen, I certainly empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of foreign entanglements in the Middle East. I understand the concern. But the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents and now we have a president who actually knows how to accomplish America's national security objectives. So this is not going to be some long, drawn-out thing. We've got in. We've done the job of setting their nuclear program back. We're going to now work to permanently dismantle that nuclear program over the coming years. And that is what the president has set out to do. Simple principle: Iran can't have a nuclear weapon. That has animated American policy over the past 130 days. It's going to continue to be a driving force of our policy in the Middle East for the next three and a half years. KRISTEN WELKER: Vice President JD Vance, thank you for joining us on a pivotal day. We hope you will come back very soon. VICE PRES. JD VANCE: Thanks, Kristen. Good morning. KRISTEN WELKER: And good day to you. When we come back, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina joins me next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. And joining me now is Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Senator Graham, welcome back to Meet the Press. SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: Thank you. KRISTEN WELKER: Thank you so much for being here. So, you praised the president's decision overnight. And I know you just got off of the phone with Prime Minister Netanyahu. What did he say to you about this moment? SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, first about the president's decision, I thought it was bold, quite frankly brilliant militarily, necessary, and most importantly effective. So, well done, Mr. President, to your team and our military. It is a fantastic operation that has substantially degraded, I think, Iran's nuclear program. So I talked to Bibi, just a few minutes ago. And I said, "What would you like me to say?" He said, "Tell the American people Israel is profoundly grateful' for all we do for Israel, and 'very grateful to President Trump for what he ordered last night.' Two messages: he wanted me to urge the Iranian people to end this madness, take this regime down, and have a better life for yourselves, and be part of the region in a new and different way. And second, he wanted me to tell the American people Israel's not going to live this way anymore. They're not going to live under threat from Iran, anymore. Last night, they were attacked. The early morning hours of today, after the attack by President Trump, Israel fired ballistic missiles into Israel, wounding Israeli citizens. Twenty four have been killed. "This regime is not going to be tolerated by Israel," is what he told me. KRISTEN WELKER: Okay. So let me follow up with you on that point, Senator, because Prime Minister Netanyahu has signaled that the Israelis want to carry out regime change. Would you support that, if Israel were to carry out regime change? SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: If I were Israel, I would have done it a long time ago. They've been held back, in many ways. What would be the right response, if America had a ballistic missile fired into our country and killed our citizens? We would wipe the offender off the map. So here's what I hope. After the hospital attack— and they were so lucky not to lose a lot of people— Israel's made a decision, this regime is going to change in one of two ways. They're going to change their behavior, which I doubt— the regime itself— or the people who are going to replace the regime. They have less capability today than they did yesterday, but they're still religious Nazis. They want to purify Islam. They want to destroy the Jewish state and kick us out of the Mideast. Nothing's changed about the religious Nazi makeup of the regime. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Extraordinary details from your call with the prime minister. Let me ask you about this divide within the Republican Party. You, of course, did support the war in Iraq. The intelligence there turned out to be incorrect. Steve Bannon, one of President Trump's closest allies, his former chief strategist in his first term, is arguing and argued in the run-up to yesterday's strikes, that this was the wrong move, that it was just going to be another mistake, like what he called the Iraq War. Take a listen to a little bit of what he had to say. [BEGIN TAPE] STEVE BANNON: This is exactly the same pitch as the Iraq War, weapons of mass destruction. TUCKER CARLSON: Oh. I know. STEVE BANNON: You have to get it. So they understand one thing, they think the playbook works. This is why we have to stop it now. If we don't stop it now, it's going to work all the time. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: Senator, given that, why should the American people believe that this was the right time to strike Iran? SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: It was necessary. It was bold. It was brilliant. Hats off to the president. In May of 2022, Iran had 95 pounds of highly enriched uranium to make a handful of bombs. By May of 2025, they had 900 pounds. Sixty percent enriched uranium has no commercial purpose. They have one peaceful reactor, actually, in Iran. They haven't used one gram of their enrichment program to run that reactor. They get their fuel from Russia for civilian purposes. They had 900 pounds of highly enriched uranium to make more than a dozen bombs. This was the right call at the right time. It stopped their program from advancing even further. Iran with a nuclear weapon is an existential threat to the state of Israel. The country is in the hands of religious Nazis. They want to kill all the Jews. And they're coming after us. And they were set back. And to Steve Bannon and all those people, Iran is different. Nuclear weapons in the hands of the Ayatollah is a nightmare for the world. KRISTEN WELKER: Their concern, though, is that this could lead to a wider war, maybe, boots on the ground. Vice President JD Vance said that they're not interested in boots on the ground— didn't necessarily rule it out. Are you worried about that? SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: No. I don't think I'll see boots on the ground in our future. But I do see Israel not stopping. Israel's not going to live this way anymore. They're not going to be subject to missile attack every day and every night, living in bunkers. They're going to go after the heart of this regime. They're going to take it down, one of two ways, make it change or replace it. KRISTEN WELKER: What do you say to your fellow members of Congress who say that President Trump should have gotten congressional approval before taking this action? Did the president violate the Constitution by acting unilaterally? SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: No. He was within his Article II authority. Congress can declare war or cut off funding. We can't be the Commander in Chief. You can't have 535 commander-in-chiefs. If you don't like what the president does, in terms of war, you can cut off the funding. But declaring war is left to the Congress. We've declared war five times in the history of America. All of these other military operations were lawful. He had all the authority he needs under the Constitution. They are wrong. KRISTEN WELKER: One minute left, two questions. We did see with past wars, the Iraq War, the Gulf War, the War in Afghanistan, the presidents then went to Congress. Why should now be different, Senator? SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, there's a lot of actions where the president did go to Congress. This was something that had to be done quietly. Last thing you want to do is come to Congress with an attack this sensitive. So what's the big picture? Saudi-Israel is more likely than ever. The Arabs are very impressed. I think we're going to see real change in the Mideast. The weaker Iran, the stronger the likelihood of peace. The Saudi-Arab-Israel deal, I think, is back on track. As to Russia, how does this affect Russia? I've got 84 co-sponsors for a Russian sanctions bill that is an economic bunker buster against China, India, and Russia for their brutal invasion— Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine. I think that bill is going to pass. We're going to give the president a waiver. It will be a tool in his toolbox to bring Putin to the table. KRISTEN WELKER: It's time to vote on that bill? SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: It's time to vote. Putin is getting worse, not better. Give the president a bunker buster tool, economically, to get Putin to the table. Putin is more aggressive, not less. It's time to change tactics when it comes to Putin. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Senator Graham, thank you so much for being here. SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: Thank you. KRISTEN WELKER: Really appreciate it. Great to see you, as always. And when we come back, Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona joins me next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. And joining me now is Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona. Senator Kelly, welcome back to Meet the Press. SEN. MARK KELLY: Thank you for having me on, Kristen. KRISTEN WELKER: Thank you so much for being here in person. We really appreciate it. I do want to get your reaction to President Trump's strikes that he launched overnight. Do you trust the administration's assessment that all three nuclear sites have been, quote, "totally obliterated?" SEN. MARK KELLY: Well, let me just start by saying, you know, what I think should have happened here, you know, right up front is him coming to Congress and asking for authorization to do this. That's the constitutional approach to this. He could have talked to us about what the goal is and what the plan is ahead of time. And we could have had a discussion about it. He says these sites were obliterated. If you listen to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Caine, clearly we've got to do bomb damage assessment. It's hard to figure out even when you're destroying a building, in this case, the buildings are actually underground, buried 200 feet, dirt, rock, concrete. It's a really hard problem. And I'm not clear, it's not clear to me, and it's probably not going to be for some time, whether we actually took out their capability. KRISTEN WELKER: Let me ask you, because Vice President JD Vance – about your argument that the president should have come to Congress, argued that it wasn't necessary. He said the president has the authority to act to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. What's your reaction to Vice President Vance who said he absolutely had the right to act unilaterally? SEN. MARK KELLY: Well, I would say when there's a clear and imminent threat to U.S. citizens, to the United States, to the homeland, the commander-in-chief has a right to act. That wasn't the case here. And I think certainly for the 40,000 troops in at least six countries in the Middle East, we have a lot of the bases in the Middle East, those troops are now at greater risk. I think folks here at home, as well, are at greater risk. We could see terrorist attacks here. The Iranians still have a lot of proxies. They could go after us. The escalatory factor of this action that was taken yesterday is significant. KRISTEN WELKER: You are on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Let me ask you, do you have confidence in U.S. intelligence, which assessed back in March that Iran was not on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon? SEN. MARK KELLY: Kristen, I look at this intelligence every single day from the CIA, the NSA, the Defense Intelligence Agency. They do a really good job. The intelligence picture often changes. And we've been looking at this for – I've been on the Intelligence Committee for about a year and a half, been on Armed Services my entire time in the United States Senate. And it's a changing picture. But what I will say is as far as we know, the Iranians were not in the process of developing a weapon. They were enriching uranium. The vice president's right, and Lindsey too, the 60%. You need it way above 90% to actually have weapon's grade. But it was more than what they would need for power generation. So they were in the process. They were doing something we did not want them to do. But they were still, you know, working within the international community here. It was clear what they had. My big fear right now is that they take this entire program underground. We don't know — not physically underground but under the radar. And we don't know what they're going to do here in the future. They might try to race to the development of a nuclear weapon. Where we tried to stop it, there is a possibility that this could accelerate it. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, and let me ask you this question then because, of course, you heard President Trump's remarks overnight urging Iran to get back to the negotiating table. Iran says it's poised for a counter-attack. Do you think that there is any hope for diplomacy at this point or is that dead? SEN. MARK KELLY: No, I mean, I think there's always hope, you know, that we could get back to the negotiating table. That's what we should have done. We should have exhausted all options. We could have spent another month at this. There was no clear, present, immediate danger to us and our troops. And even to Israel, with regards to the nuclear capability, and the Israelis were doing an incredible job, conventionally going after targets, going after, you know, the missile defense system, the medium-range ballistic missiles that they have. They were very, very effective. We could have let them do that for some time. We could have tried to restart these negotiations in weeks or even a month. It was not — it did not have to be done like this right now. KRISTEN WELKER: You are a veteran. You're no stranger to the theater of combat. What is your message to the some 40,000 U.S. troops who are stationed in the Middle East, who are right now on heightened alert as Iran warns about a potential counter-attack? SEN. MARK KELLY: Well, you know, I find it interesting that the person without combat experience is often the first person to want to drop a bomb. And that's what we see here. And what we did last night puts those troops, 40,000 of them, at further risk. But we are going to do everything we can to protect them. Now, we've got a very capable – we've got a very capable military. We're going to do our best to defend our interests. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Senator Mark Kelly, thank you so much for being here. SEN. MARK KELLY: Thank you. KRISTEN WELKER: Really appreciate it. Great to see you as always. When we come back, Iran fires its first missiles against Israel since the U.S. strikes. We get the very latest from the ground in Tel Aviv from NBC's Richard Engel next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. NBC News Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel joins me from Tel Aviv. Richard, the region, as we've been talking about all morning long, is on heightened alert. What are you hearing and seeing on the ground there? RICHARD ENGEL: Israel is, first of all, on a very heightened alert. The home front command here has issued new guidance, canceling school, school events, assemblies, non-essential work. People told effectively to stay by their homes, stay by shelters. And just shortly after the U.S. strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, Iran did respond with dozens of ballistic missiles fired at Israel, several exploding here in Tel Aviv, also some in Haifa. No reports of fatalities at this stage. So we are already seeing a military response, but nothing against American interests so far. We are hearing a lot from Gulf Arab countries but no serious condemnations. There are, privately, many Gulf countries that are quite happy with what just happened. We are hearing many calls for resumption of dialogue. People say that it's time to stop fighting and go back to the negotiating table. The only real threat we've heard is from the Houthis, who say it is just a matter of time before they will respond. The Iranians have a totally different assessment of what has happened. They say their nuclear facilities were attacked. They acknowledge that. But they say that they brought out their personnel and managed to evacuate some of the critical materials before they were attacked. So they are trying to brush this off. The Iranian Foreign Minister now on his way to Moscow. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Richard Engel in Tel Aviv for us. Please stay safe, Richard. Thank you so much for joining us with your great reporting this morning. And when we come back, what happens next in the war with Iran? The panel is next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. The panel is here. NBC News Chief Washington Correspondent Andrea Mitchell; Jonathan Martin, Politics Bureau Chief and Senior Political Columnist at Politico; Ashley Etienne, former communications director to Vice President Harris; and Lanhee Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Thanks to all of you for being here on what is shaping up to be a historic Sunday. Andrea, what are your key takeaways? We heard Senator Mark Kelly raise questions about whether the nuclear facilities were actually destroyed. You are getting reaction to that, and some new reaction from the Arab world and Arab diplomats. ANDREA MITCHELL: Well, first of all, the chairman of the joint chiefs acknowledged they do not know the bomb damage assessment yet. Now, we believe that there are covert Israeli operatives on the ground. They had planned a covert operation with American air cover back in April, which the president vetoed at that point. So there probably are Israelis on the ground who can do a better assessment, but the Iranians had moved a lot of their material out of Fordo, even before this happened. And so it's not clear whether they got it all. It's in tunnels. That's one of the issues that the – the U.N. inspectors raised, that they can no longer tell where things are hidden and that Iran was hiding material. And as the foreign minister said to me just on Friday, that "They can bomb, you know, our nuclear facilities. They can't bomb our knowledge." KRISTEN WELKER: And – and Jonathan, I thought it was so fascinating to hear Vice President JD Vance would not say directly the United States is at war with Iran. He said, "The U.S. is at war with its nuclear facilities." JONATHAN MARTIN: Yeah. KRISTEN WELKER: Can you split the two? JONATHAN MARTIN: Well, I was struck by that too for a lot of reasons. First is because his personal politics are much more isolationist, and so I think clearly he's trying to find the best way to present this. Secondly, the Iranians have a say in this too. JD Vance could come on TV and say, "We're not at war with the country, only their nuclear program," but that's today. We'll see what the response is because, if they choose to respond by attacking U.S. bases, U.S. embassies, or god forbid some kind of a terrorist attack, then guess what? This is going to escalate, and we are going to have a wider conflict. So it's easy to say that right now, but the Iranian response is going to be crucial to decide what happens in the weeks ahead. KRISTEN WELKER: Yes. Lanhee, as the world watches and waits to see what the Iranian response will be, there is this extraordinary divide within the Republican Party. J. Mart spoke to it, the fact that JD Vance had traditionally been a non-interventionist. You're seeing the MAGA wing of the Republican Party at odds with each other. Steve Bannon, Tucker Carlson saying, "We don't want to repeat the mistakes of Iraq." LANHEE CHEN: Well, look. I think you saw some of that disagreement leading up to last night. I haven't seen a lot of disagreement since then. Frankly, I've seen a lot of unity amongst Republicans because, remember, this is something – this was a unifying point for a lot of Republicans going well back to the days of John McCain and George W. Bush and Mitt Romney and other nominees of the party, to talk about keeping Iran from having that nuclear capability. This has been a core foreign policy tenet of the Republican Party for a very long time. And I do think, at this point, if the president is right and this is more akin to the taking out of Soleimani and some of the attacks that we saw, for example, against Al Qaeda in Somalia earlier this year, then I think he's going to be able to hold the coalition together. Now, the question of course is what is Iran's response? What is our response? That remains to be seen. But today, this morning, we're seeing a lot of unity amongst Republicans on this. KRISTEN WELKER: So many unknowns – ASHLEY ETIENNE: Absolutely. KRISTEN WELKER: – Ashley Etienne, and the response from a number of Democrats, you heard it from Senator Kelly. And we saw it online from Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez overnight, going so far as to say that President Trump should be impeached over this. Does that go too far? We aren't hearing a number of other Democrats line up behind that argument. ASHLEY ETIENNE: I mean, we're in a very dangerous stage right now as a nation. The president no doubt violated his trust with the American people. He promised that he wouldn't take us to war in the Middle East, and here we are now. He's threatening to escalate, not deescalate. But, you're right, the concern is that there are more questions than there are answers. What is the strategic aim here? Is it regime change? Is it the weapons? What's the implication for our troops? And then you have both Democrats and Republicans that are making the point and were raising the concern that the president violated the Constitution, that he's going it alone, that he didn't engage Congress, that he's not engaging our allies. And the one lesson we don't want to learn – relearn again is the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan, and that is where we are right now. So that's a concern that Democrats are going to continue to raise. They're going to pressure the president. They're on the offensive, I believe. They're going to pressure the president for answers in the next few days, and we'll see how far we can get with this. KRISTEN WELKER: And you take me perfectly to my question to Andrea. I mean, you covered the Iraq War. A number of people saying there are echoes, particularly this debate over the intelligence. What are you kind of watching as you keep that in the rear-view mirror, Andrea? ANDREA MITCHELL: I was fascinated by what the vice president told you, that this was based on U.S. and other allied intelligence. Because Netanyahu had presented – the prime minister of course of Israel – had presented them that this was imminent, the development. Nobody else agreed that it was that imminent. Yes, they could build a bomb. They were way over 60% enrichment. Nobody needs that for civilian purposes. They've never justified that. But that they had not weaponized it. It was still a year or so away. He had never explained what that was. That was their intelligence. U.S. intelligence, as of last Monday, as you pointed out Senator Mark Warner saying, did not agree with that. So there is no real intelligence. It's not like what happened before, when bad intelligence brought us into war with Iraq. But – but right now, what happens next? In talking to this Arab diplomatic source just moments ago in reaction to what Senator Lindsey Graham said, he said, "First of all," this source said that, "This depends on whether this becomes a war of attrition." Do they – do they retaliate? Do they feel so weak that they have to retaliate? And, if they do, do they then – does Iran attack U.S. forces? Then it's all out, a war of attrition, all bets are off. If they do what they've done before with proxies, the Strait of Hormuz and other things, that's another – that's another story. And then what does Israel do? Israel has to deal with the Palestinians before the Saudi deal can get back on track. JONATHAN MARTIN: But in the short term, Israel's going to do something else which is keep bombarding the Iranians. This is important to focus on. What we did last night I think is going to embolden Netanyahu and the Israelis to continue their aerial assault. We can say we don't want regime change, but this is – more to the point, this is more Israel's war than it is our war. And they're now going to keep up the assault. And it's hard to see how we get a peace deal anytime soon with the Israelis continuing to pound Iranian territory every day. ANDREA MITCHELL: If the Israelis do, Iran will hold us responsible because they now say it's our war. JONATHAN MARTIN: And Trump's always comfortable with using aerial attacks. First term, Lanhee mentioned us going after Soleimani. But it's a wholly different thing when you're talking about moving beyond using our Air Force – KRISTEN WELKER: Well – JONATHAN MARTIN: – from way above to – LANHEE CHEN: The question – JONATHAN MARTIN: – boots on the ground. LANHEE CHEN: – ultimately is on the regime change point, right? That is really where – ANDREA MITCHELL: Exactly. LANHEE CHEN: – I think the debate is going to come. Now, the Israelis I think have one of two ways of trying to achieve this, right? One is military, the other is to force the Iranians, whatever opposition there is, to foment enough against the regime. That's – that's going to be a difficult, timely process, right? So the question is how much time is there – ANDREA MITCHELL: Or – or targeted assassination, Lanhee. They've – LANHEE CHEN: Well – ANDREA MITCHELL: – proved that they know how to do this. KRISTEN WELKER: We saw that debate play out – ASHLEY ETIENNE: Sure. But can I – KRISTEN WELKER: – this morning. ASHLEY ETIENNE: – just add one thing that we're missing here is that the pressure now is on Donald Trump to prove that he can negotiate a better deal, especially after walking away from JCPOA, the Iranian deal that – KRISTEN WELKER: That was Obama's deal. ASHLEY ETIENNE: – nuclear deal that Obama negotiated. So that's where we are right now. And by all signs and indication, this is not the end, this is only the beginning. And so the pressure is on him to prove that he is the negotiator-in-chief. KRISTEN WELKER: Yes. President Trump says that – and you heard the vice president say that hopes for diplomacy – LANHEE CHEN: Right. KRISTEN WELKER: – is not necessarily dead. LANHEE CHEN: Well, and if that's the case, then there is potentially a negotiated outcome here. Now, the Iranians have to take this hard-line stance. They have to, for internal constituencies, et cetera. That's very predictable. But indeed, if they do come back to the negotiating table a – a few weeks or months from now, he could be on to something. ANDREA MITCHELL: Let me just point out that the vice president said to you, Kristen, "They should look in the mirror and realize they're not very good at this war thing." Iran is not Iraq. Iran is a major military. They fought Iraq for eight years and didn't give up. This is another story. KRISTEN WELKER: All right, guys. Great conversation. Thank you so much for being here on a big, big Sunday, we really appreciate it. That is all for today. Thank you so much for watching. We will be back next week because, if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.

Metro

4 hours ago

• Metro

Why Iran closing this 103-mile stretch of ocean could be catastrophic

As fighting between Israel and Iran is boiling over with the US now involved, the most strategic oil chokepoint in the world – the Strait of Hormuz – is in the spotlight. Concerns have been raised about just how disruptive the war could be for the steady flow of Gulf oil shipments to Europe, the US and Asia. All eyes are on the Strait of Hormuz after Iran's parliament voted to approve the closure today. The decision still needs to be rubber-stamped by the country's Supreme National Security Council. Adam Lakhani, security director at International SOS, warned that shutting it could cause a bigger market turmoil than the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Covid-19. He told Metro that the price of oil could jump from the current $71.77 to as much as $120 per barrel in a 'worst-case scenario'. 'Iran has a very well-established naval base in the city of Bandar Abbas and it has a strong naval capability,' Lakhani explained. 'So whether they decide to pull that lever… is something we are concerned about and are watching very closely.' About a fifth of the world's oil is transited through the shipping lane, which splits Iran on one side and Oman and the UAE on the other, and links the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea in the Indian Ocean. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Tankers collecting from various ports on the Persian Gulf must go through Hormuz. The strait – between 35 to 60 miles wide – has been at the heart of regional tensions for decades, but the threat from Iran to shut it has only escalated the fears. Islamic Revolutionary Guard commander Sardar Esmail Kowsari told local media that closing Hormuz 'is under consideration, and Iran will make the best decision with determination.' He said: 'Our hands are wide open when it comes to punishing the enemy, and the military response was only part of our overall response.' As a major chokepoint, the operation of Hormuz is critical to global energy security. The inability of any oil to transit – even temporarily – can create substantial supply delays and raise shipping costs, increasing world energy prices. Although most chokepoints can be bypassed by using other routes, which often add significantly to transit time, some have no alternatives. Lakhani stressed that Kowsari's threat 'should be taken seriously', judging by the US repositioning of the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier along with several support tankers to bolster the military in the region. Iran's threat to shut Homruz comes as a vessel crashed into two ships sailing nearby, 22 nautical miles east of Khor Fakkan in the UAE. The Emirati national guard said it evacuated 24 people from an oil tanker after the collision. The crude oil tanker, ADALYNN, was bound for Egypt's Suez Canal when the crash in the Gulf of Oman happened. More Trending British maritime security firm Ambrey has said the cause of the incident is 'not security-related'. Naval sources cited by Reuters warned that electronic interference with commercial ship navigation systems has surged in recent days around the strait and the wider Gulf, which is having an impact on vessels. Maritime ship experts say shipowners are increasingly wary of using the waterway, with some ships having tightened security and others canceling routes there. The Strait of Hormuz vote today comes after the US administration announced that is warplanes had dropped 'bunker buster' bombs on three key nuclear sites. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Is Donald Trump gambling his popularity and presidency with strikes on Iran? MORE: London to Dubai BA flight turns back 90 minutes from landing after Iran strikes MORE: UK prepares flights to help British nationals escape Israel after US bombs Iran