Several senators said on Friday that the administration’s unilateral offer of defense guarantees to Qatar — similar to those the U.S. has made to protect its NATO allies — deserves scrutiny from Congress.

The administration on Monday quietly issued an executive order stating that the U.S. would offer defensive guarantees to Qatar, “shall regard any armed attack on the territory, sovereignty, or critical infrastructure of the State of Qatar as a threat to the peace and security of the United States” and “shall take all lawful and appropriate measures — including diplomatic, economic, and, if necessary, military — to defend the interests of the United States and of the State of Qatar and to restore peace and stability.”

Sen. Todd Young (R-IN), a top Republican voice in favor of reclaiming congressional war powers, said that the deal “certainly strikes me as unconventional and the sort of thing that the Foreign Relations Committee might want to hold a hearing on.”

“In the end, it’s the chairman’s prerogative, but it does strike me as worthy of attention and explication in a public setting,” Young said.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), another leading advocate on war powers issues and in opposition to the administration’s acceptance of a Qatari luxury jet for use as Air Force One, said that the move will carry the perception of corruption.

“I’m very troubled by it,” Kaine said. “It just looks like it was a trade for the jet. Maybe it’s not that, but that’s the way it looks. And why would you pollute something that maybe has a good rationale — but now it’s polluted with the way everybody looks at it.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), a leading Republican critic of U.S. support for Qatar, said that he planned to speak to the president about the order. “I haven’t talked to him [the president] about it. I don’t understand why. He hasn’t explained it to me, but I’ll ask him about it,” Scott told Jewish Insider.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said that the deal “will have to be reviewed carefully, depending on whether it serves our security interests and Israel’s.”

Multiple Republican senators emphasized that the deal does not carry the force of congressional ratification as a treaty.

“I don’t think you can do that by executive order,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said.

Asked about Congress granting Qatar those protections, Graham replied: “I don’t like its chances [of getting through Congress]. I appreciate trying to stand up for Qatar because they’re helpful, but they also have another side of the story. You can’t confer Article 5 protections by executive order, and I don’t think there’d be any appetite at all to do that through a treaty.”

Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE) framed the deal as part of Trump’s pressure campaign on Hamas to agree to his framework for peace in Gaza.

“The president is always thinking about negotiations, and certainly the president can have his policy,” Ricketts said. “However, it is not something that is a treaty, so it’s really, I think, meant as a negotiating thing to help get Qatar to get Hamas to surrender.”

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) said he hadn’t reviewed the details of the agreement yet, but noted that any long-term foreign agreement would require congressional ratification to remain in effect.

“If we’re going to a national security agreement long term, that’s going to be lasting,” Congress should be consulted, Lankford said. “Things only last if they have the imprimatur of Congress actually put on it — whether it’s a trade agreement or a defense agreement. It’s got to be statute.”

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) told JI he had “not heard anything about” the deal before noting, “It’s always up to the president to decide what he would like to suggest that he would like to do. Article 5 is part of a treaty right now, and if it is a treaty-type of an agreement, it would have to come before the Senate.”

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) defended the president’s support for Qatar, telling JI, “Qatar is an important piece of the pie, a piece of the puzzle in the Middle East. We have to recognize that. We don’t always agree with everything they do, but we don’t agree with everything Israel does and we don’t agree with everything Jordan does, but they’re still close friends of ours. We know they want to be close to us and we want to, we can still use them as a strategic ally.”