That’s a strange thing to say, considering those critics are saying the exact same things his boss was saying only a few weeks ago. Indeed, we can literally compare the case for war made by the administration officials to the MOU text.  

The United States and Israel decimated the Iranian navy and air force; destroyed thousands of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps sites; eliminated a couple of strata of Iranian leadership, which includes institutional memory and talent; and bombed nuclear facilities and infrastructure, probably disabling around 22,000 Iranian centrifuges. By any standard, we dominated the military conflict.

The regime was also dealing with internal anger and soaring inflation, teetering on the edge of economic collapse.

So, the question is, under these conditions, what concessions did Vance get from the Iranians that weren’t in place before the war? Because we surrendered plenty.

The U.S. immediately lifted its naval blockade, allowing Iran’s oil exports to flow and frozen assets without any restrictions on how or where that money is sent or used. Among the 14 points in the MOU, however, there are only two items that could, if we’re being generous, be defined as an Iranian concession.

In the first, the Guard promises that the Strait of Hormuz is returned to prewar traffic levels within 30 days. Well, the passage was fully open to international shipping before we attacked Iran. What the clerics learned was that the strait is a pressure point that the world’s only superpower isn’t willing to open. They now know they can blackmail us whenever they like. They’ve already made noise about tolling ships. Trump claims that we have “no choice” but to cave. That does not bode well for our standing in the world.

Two, the clerics “reiterate” that they will never produce any nuclear weapons. That’s not new, either. The mullahs have been lying about their pursuit of nuclear weapons for over 40 years. And the notion that the Iranian regime is going to be more likely to consent to genuine on-site, any-time inspectors now that military blockades and sanctions are eased is far-fetched.

Vance says the nuclear weapons program has been destroyed. “It is gone.” But Trump, who demanded “unconditional surrender,” promised the people the war would end only when we had access to enriched uranium. “There will be no enrichment of Uranium,” Trump said in April. Now, the president says Iran could enrich at low levels, and the existing uranium will be “down-blended” rather than seized.

What about ballistic missiles? Not only was the destruction of the regime’s missile program one of the central objectives of the Iran war, but it was also typically the first objective that people in the administration mentioned: 

“First, we’re destroying Iran’s missile capabilities … and their capacity to produce brand new ones,” Trump told the public on March 2.

That same day, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the press that the objective of Operation Epic Fury was to “destroy their ballistic missile capability and make sure they can’t rebuild it and make sure that they can’t hide behind that to have a nuclear program.”

“No. 1,” press secretary Karoline Leavitt said two days later, was to “destroy the regime’s deadly ballistic missiles and completely raze their missile industry to the ground.” Adm. Brad Cooper, commander of U.S. Central Command, noted that the president had asked him to “systemically dismantle Iran’s missile production capability for the future.”

Trump has been warning about the dangers of Islamic terrorists building long-range ballistic missiles for at least a decade, as well. One of the president’s most often-used critiques of former President Barack Obama’s deal with Iran was that it failed to address the missile program properly. The issue was prominently mentioned in the speech he gave when withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

During the war, incidentally, Iran launched surprise intercontinental ballistic missiles 2,500 miles at a military base in the Indian Ocean. Which is fine now, I guess, because the issue isn’t even included anywhere in the MOU.

It’s worse, actually. When a reporter asked the president why he didn’t mind Iran having ballistic missiles, Trump answered, “I’m saying if other countries have them, it’s a little bit unfair for them to not have some.” Even for Trump, this is an eye-popping U-turn. Using this logic, the U.S. should allow the terrorist clerics to build nuclear weapons to ensure fairness.

On March 2, Trump told the people he was “ensuring that the Iranian regime cannot continue to arm, fund, and direct terrorist armies outside of their borders.” After all, Iranian proxies had killed hundreds of Americans over the years. Two days later, Leavitt told the press that “Operation Epic Fury will ensure the regime’s terrorist proxies can no longer destabilize the region or the free world and attack our armed forces.”

The Iranian mullahs happily sacrifice thousands of Arab lives in their jihad against the West and Israel. Yet, the MOU still handed Iran a ceasefire agreement that included the sovereign nation of Lebanon. Why? Hezbollah is a terrorist army occupying another country. Lebanon, need it be said, is not Iran. As of this writing, Hezbollah has fired at Israel dozens of times, killing four. Hezbollah will not be restrained by Iran — indeed, it takes orders from it — but Israel will surely be restrained by the U.S. to preserve the deal.

One of the big Trump criticisms of the Obama deal was that clerics had used the funds sent to them by Democrats to prop up proxies and build an outside military force rather than lift their own people. Yet, Vance’s deal has the U.S. promising to release “at least” $300 billion for the “reconstruction and economic development” of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Reconstruct what? The U.S. and Israel engaged in high-precision military targeting. The money will immediately be sunk into rebuilding that military infrastructure and funding proxies.

To make a distinction between the MOU and the JCPOA, Vance claims that the “Obama deal gave them over a billion dollars of American money. This deal gives them zero dollars of American money.”

Like much of what Vance has said about the deal, it’s highly misleading. The $1.7 billion JCPOA payment, famously known as the “pallets of cash,” wasn’t American money, either. Does Vance believe it’s OK to siphon funding to a terrorist regime as long as it’s not taxpayer money?

Who knows if any of this money will ever reach Iran? But the notion that Islamic revolutionaries are rational actors looking to turn over a “new leaf” and enticed by economic incentives so that their people can thrive, as Vance has claimed, is an embarrassingly naïve position. The clerics have always had the option of avoiding bloodshed and building a strong economy. They have zero rational geopolitical reasons for being at war with the U.S. or Israel. They have theological ones.

Even if Iranian leaders ostensibly spend the new funding on “economic development,” money is fungible. The mullahs will be oil-rich soon enough. And the MOU promises that Iran and the U.S. will refrain from “interfering in each other’s internal affairs.”

Now, many Republicans I know support the MOU because they want to get out of the war before the midterm elections. They don’t believe Iran is worth the political capital or effort. And that’s a completely rational political position to take.

IRAN DEAL WALKS AND QUACKS LIKE A DEBACLE

But then we should have just packed up and withdrawn. Instead, the administration decided to prop up the Iranian regime.

It’s not difficult to understand why Vance would want this deal. But Trump? Even considering his mercurial nature, this capitulation is remarkable.