Congressional allies warned President Trump Thursday evening the U.S. shouldn’t retaliate against Iran’s downing of a drone in a way that could trigger a broader conflict.
“Some response may be appropriate but full engagement definitely is not going to get support,” Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., one of Trump’s closest allies on Capitol Hill, told the Washington Examiner.
The Freedom Caucus chairman warned against any retaliation that is too “involved,” pointing instead to Iranian anti-aircraft batteries as a suitable target. He wasn’t alone, as distaste for any large-scale conflict limited senior Republicans to calling for either very limited strikes or simply tightening diplomatic and economic screws on the regime.
“They’ve got a bunch oil platforms left in the Gulf, we should shut those down and respond that way,” said Texas Rep. Mike Conaway, one of the top Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, to the Washington Examiner. “If it’s a platform, you give them a warning, get all their people off it, but something has to go.”
Such a bloodless punishment could befit Iran’s shooting down an unmanned U.S. surveillance drone early Thursday morning, one week after the regime carried out attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman that similarly seemed designed to avoid causing any casualties.
“You take out the platforms, you sink boats, it’s over,” Conaway said.
Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla., a senior member of the Foreign Relations panel, resisted the idea of any military response at all. Trump should “send them a bill for that drone,” Yoho said, before specifically pushing back against another Republican, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., who proposed “retaliatory strikes” against Iran earlier this week in response to the oil tanker attacks.
“I think Iran needs to know that there are people that are ready to do military action, but I don’t think this justifies it,” said Yoho. “That just is the beginning of escalation. I would wait until they did something more egregious but let them know … Don’t do any more things like this to the United States because it’s going to lead to something you’re really not going to like.”
The incident raised the prospect of a direct military confrontation between the U.S. and Iran, after weeks of simmering tensions. Trump seemed to acknowledge that he was contemplating such a strike after the Pentagon accused Iran of conducting “an unprovoked attack on a U.S. surveillance asset in international airspace.” But he also suggested that a rogue actor was responsible.
“I find it hard to believe it was intentional, if you want to know the truth,” the president said Thursday. “I think that it could have been somebody who was loose and stupid that did it.”
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., called for a “measured response” to the attack in a statement released after Trump huddled with Republican and Democratic leaders at the White House.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell likewise said that “the administration is engaged in I think what I would call ‘measured responses.’”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sounded a cautious note. “[I]t is essential that we remain fully engaged with our allies, recognize that we are not dealing with a responsible adversary and do everything in our power to de-escalate,” she said. ”This is a dangerous, high-tension situation that requires a strong, smart and strategic, not reckless, approach.”
Conaway maintained that a retaliatory strike is imperative, even if Trump can’t guarantee how the Iranians will react.
“You cannot ignore the provocation,” he said. “That’s up to Iran. They get a vote. They get the next vote. We get this vote. Do we respond? Yes. They get the next vote. And you can’t control them, so, they’re going to do what they’re going to do. We cannot leave these provocations unanswered.”
