ASPEN, Colo. — Robert Greenway, who led the Middle East and North Africa portfolio on the National Security Council during President Donald Trump’s first administration, predicted to Jewish Insider in an interview last month that the Iranian regime would not “make it” to the end of Trump’s time in office.

Greenway’s comments came amid the resumption of hostilities between the U.S. and Iran in late July, following the collapse of the countries’ memorandum of understanding, prior to the latest pause in U.S. strikes.

“We’ve really put ourselves in a position where we’ve got massive leverage. Their economy is virtually non-existent. I think it’s dead. We’re just waiting for the funeral, I think their political leadership is in turmoil,” Greenway said in an interview on the sidelines of the Aspen Security Forum. “The military has been decimated, and very little capacity remains to threaten the United States and our interests. That’s the reality of it. Despite claims to the contrary — those are not serious claims. They’re not supported by the facts.”

Greenway said that the administration’s military success had allowed it to “indulge a potential diplomatic path” that it knew was “unlikely” to actually succeed.

After the war, Greenway said that the U.S.’ regional approach should include working to contain Iran, building on the burgeoning regional security architecture developed with other Middle East allies and expanding the Abraham Accords. He was bullish about the chances for expanded normalization in spite of the apparent obstacles created by the wars in Gaza and Iran.

“The destruction [and] the attrition [in] Iran lowers the price of admission” for the Abraham Accords, Greenway said. “The math equation works here because we’ve reduced the Iranian threat. So there isn’t a massive requirement for us to provide enormous capabilities” to Arab states as a price for normalization.

Greenway was involved in negotiating the Abraham Accords during Trump’s first administration and continued to work to promote normalization after leaving the administration, first as the executive director of the Abraham Accords Peace Institute and later as the director of the Allison Center for National Security at the Heritage Foundation.

“Getting Saudi Arabia and the other states integrated into the region with Israel and expanding the accords is different now than it was a year or four years ago,” Greenway continued. “But it is still, I think, practical, necessary and achievable.”

He was dismissive of Saudi statements that the kingdom intends to condition normalization on a path to a two-state solution, arguing that such statements are a “public rhetorical mechanism that serves a purpose” but won’t be enforced in practice.

Greenway was a member of the Heritage Foundation when the group issued a report last year — which was controversial at the time — calling for the gradual phasing out of U.S. military aid to Israel. In the months since, the concept has been endorsed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and some American supporters of Israel, and most observers expect that a drawdown of direct financial support will be a component of the next U.S.-Israel memorandum of understanding.

He said that phasing out U.S. aid would insulate Israel from American attempts to exert leverage over Jerusalem, such as that undertaken by the Biden administration. He said that the threat of growing Democratic shifts against Israel are a key reason for the U.S. to work to ensure that Israel no longer needs aid.

“Let’s improve Israel’s economy, let’s improve the trade that exists between our two countries, the security cooperation that exists between our two countries and our industries, and let’s improve Israel’s relationship to its neighbors, and if we can, reduce the threat,” Greenway said of the path to phasing out aid.

But he also said that aid should only be phased out “if Israel was in a financial position to do it, and its security relative to its neighbors was increased.”

He argued that Israel “doesn’t want” the U.S. involved in its relations with the Palestinians. Instead, he said the U.S. can best help Israel through economic ties and working to broker relationships with its neighbors, things Israel “can’t do … for itself.”

Greenway — as a Trump ally — was something of an outlier at the Aspen conference, which has generally attracted more traditional internationalist voices on the left and right. He said he wanted to urge the attendees to judge Trump and his administration by their results, rather than by rhetoric.

He pointed to the administration’s policy on Russia as one example. He argued that, while Trump has been accused of “coddling” Russia, he’s managed to severely damage Russia’s economy as well as press European countries to curtail their energy purchases that had been fueling Russia’s war machine.

“That actually, concrete, matters, right? And again, if you’re using a different lens and arbiter to look at how policies actually succeed or prevail or not, you can get to dangerous places,” Greenway said.

Greenway was also involved in crafting the Project Esther antisemitism strategy at the Heritage Foundation. Asked about how to avoid the encroachment of antisemitism on the right, Greenway pointed back to that strategy, and argued that Republicans have been more successful in fighting antisemitism in their party than Democrats.

“Republicans aren’t electing high officials that hold antisemitic principles and anti-Israel positions,” Greenway said. “I can’t say the same for the Democratic Party. … You cannot, as a Republican, stand up and make antisemitic comments and expect to survive, much less win an election or even become a candidate representing the party. It just isn’t going to happen.”

But he also said that there is a “very real struggle” to resist those trends and the problem of growing youth antisemitism crosses party lines, a phenomenon he blamed on conservatives “losing control of curricula and institutions and education.”

He said conservatives should work to reform educational systems and have zero tolerance for antisemitism.

The Trump administration on Monday sent a fresh slate of diplomatic nominations to the Senate for approval. But noticeably absent was a full-throated push to fill critical vacancies across the Middle East and North Africa, even as the Iran conflict has increased the need for coordination and dialogue in the region.

The newest list of nominees included only two names for the MENA region: Donald Blome, tapped to serve as assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs — a role that acts as the principal advisor on U.S. foreign policy across the region — and Nick Oberheiden, nominated to be U.S. ambassador to Egypt.

The lack of attention to Middle East ambassadorships underscores a broader staffing vacancy first reported by The Wall Street Journal in May, which noted that more than 100 U.S. ambassador posts remain unfilled under the current administration, including in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Iraq and Kuwait.

Experts told Jewish Insider that the administration is rapidly running out of time to fill these vacancies and implement its preferred candidates before the midterm elections potentially change the makeup of Congress and threaten to leave the president with a less cooperative Senate. 

Analysts have suggested that the vacancies may reflect a deliberate strategic preference, noting that President Donald Trump has bypassed traditional bureaucratic channels and instead relied on his immediate inner circle — including White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner — to spearhead high-level engagement and negotiations in the region.

Even so, several foreign policy analysts have argued that leaving these senior posts vacant is an unwise strategy that risks eroding U.S. influence and diplomacy at a time of conflict and pivotal regional realignment. 

Reps. Mike Lawler (R-NY) and Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), the chair and ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee, are set to introduce a bill on Monday to disrupt the finances of the Iranian regime and its allies and expand internet access in Iran.

The Iran Human Rights, Internet Freedom and Accountability Act would create a dedicated “Iran Kleptocracy Initiative” unit within the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a bureau within the Treasury Department.

The office would be charged with identifying assets of Iranian government officials and their family members; coordinating with the Department of State to freeze and confiscate those assets; to “repurpose” seized assets to support Iranian dissidents where possible; to coordinate with various federal agencies to pursue civil and criminal prosecutions of individuals connected to these financial networks; and to create a reward system for those who assist in identifying such assets and prosecuting related individuals.

The bill would allow congressional leaders to demand that the administration assess whether specific Iranian individuals meet the standards to be sanctioned for supporting the regime’s human rights abuses, censorship and repression.

To expand internet access, it directs the Defense Innovation Unit and the Defense Acquisition University to “support the development of of low-cost, easily scalable, and rapidly deployable technologies to counter internet shutdowns or limitations in Iran,” including seeking out and backing existing or developing technologies that can evade internet blackouts by the Iranian government and working with industry and academia to quickly develop, deploy and test those technologies,

The bill proposes providing $2 million annually for those efforts through 2030. It  also proposes increased funding for the internet freedom grants for Iran from to $30 million annually through 2030, doubling the proposed funding levels currently laid out in federal statute.

The legislation urges the administration to utilize U.S. international broadcasting systems — which some lawmakers have criticized for staying on the sidelines during the latest protests — to provide accurate information to Iranian civilians and support independent Iranian journalists.

It further directs the administration to assemble a report on senior “foreign political figures and oligarchs in Iran” and parastatal entities in Iran, the various business ties and assets held by those individuals, entities and their family members and the impacts of imposing sanctions and other restrictions on them.

And it instructs the administration to report to Congress on the feasibility of certain technologies to expand internet access, an analysis of potential obstacles and a summary of telecommunications providers active in Iran and their ownership.

“The Iranian regime fears one thing above all else: a connected, informed population. That’s why it shuts down the internet, censors dissent, and jails journalists,” Lawler said in a statement. “Comprehensive legislation is needed to expand internet freedom and target the financial networks of corrupt officials. We must increase pressure where it belongs and support with all of our might those fighting for freedom and democracy.”

“Despite the absolute brutality they continue to endure at the hands of this murderous regime, the Iranian people are bravely continuing to fight for their freedom,” Sherman said in a statement. “I’m proud to join my colleague Congressman Lawler in introducing legislation to stand with these brave protesters by creating a new, whole-of-government strategy to take down this regime. The Islamic Republic is weaker than it ever has been, and we must seize the moment. I know in our lifetimes, we will see a free Iran.”

The legislation is being supported by AIPAC, which is hosting a conference for activists in Washington next week and has meetings set with more than 400 congressional offices.

“This critical legislation expresses support for the fundamental freedoms of the Iranian people, promotes secure access to the internet, and advances efforts to hold oppressors accountable for human rights abuses,” AIPAC spokesperson Deryn Sousa said in a statement. “AIPAC urges Congress to pass this bipartisan measure to stand with the people of Iran and reinforce America’s commitment to human rights and digital freedom.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) announced on Tuesday that he had drafted legislation designating the Polisario Front, the militant group that claims sovereignty over parts of the Western Sahara, as a foreign terrorist organization and will formally introduce it “if there’s no change in their behavior.”

Cruz made the comments at a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee hearing focused on U.S. counterterrorism efforts in North Africa, after the hearing’s witnesses — the State Department’s Robert Palladino and Joel Borkert — both declined to agree with his statement that “the terrorist activity in the Sahel [region in Africa] is coming from the Polisario Front.”

“Iran is trying to turn the Polisario Front into the Houthis for West Africa, a proxy force capable of waging war to threaten regional stability and pressure U.S. partners whenever Iran wants leverage,” Cruz said. “The Polisario Front works with Iranian terrorist groups. It takes drones from the IRGC. It moves weapons and resources around the region, including to jihadists and much more.”

“I believe they should be designated as a terrorist group, and I’ve drafted a bill to do so if there’s no change in their behavior,” he added.

The Polisario Front is a separatist militant group founded in 1973 to fight against the Spanish occupation of parts of the Western Sahara. After Spain handed control of the territory to Mauritania and Morocco in 1975, splitting the land between the two countries, the PF waged war against both nations, hitting military and civilian targets while demanding recognition of Sahrawi ethnic group’s claims to the territory. The group declared in 1976 that all disputed territory in the region was part of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, and currently controls an area east of the Moroccan Wall. 

Mauritania, now an Islamic republic, fell to the PF and formally recognized the SADR in 1979. While Morocco and the PF agreed to a United Nations-brokered ceasefire in 1991 that remains in effect today, the PF’s increasingly close ties to Algeria, Nigeria and Iran while governing the disputed Saharan territory have become a source of concern to those opposed to Tehran’s growing influence in the region. 

President Donald Trump recognized Morocco’s claim to the Western Sahara in late 2020 at the conclusion of his first administration, as part of the deal brokered for Morocco to join the Abraham Accords. 

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) introduced legislation designating the PF as a foreign terrorist organization last June. The House bill has been co-sponsored by Reps. Randy Fine (R-FL), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL), Jefferson Shreve (R-IN) and Lance Gooden (R-TX). 

Speaking on his “Verdict with Ted Cruz” podcast on Tuesday evening, the Texas senator described Africa as a “major front for radical Islamic terrorism” and said the continent serves as “a major battleground” pitting Russia and China against the United States. 

Regarding the PF, Cruz noted that, “The best way to understand it is as a Cold War relic, analogous to the Palestinian Liberation Front, the PLO, but it was in West Africa, and there’s still a degree to which that framework is accurate.”

“It is a darling of the international left and the United Nations, and the group has continued its insurgency against Morocco,” Cruz explained. “The critical dynamic is that Iran has begun pouring resources into the group. … The Iranians have been providing money and weapons and directions.”

Palladino, a senior bureau official with the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, said in his opening remarks to the committee that the Trump administration was looking “to North African countries to provide critical support to ensuring terrorist activity in the Sahel does not spread west to the Gulf of Guinea or north to regain a foothold in North Africa, where they represent a more immediate threat to the United States and our interests.”

After Cruz pressed him on if he was referring to the PF, Palladino did not answer directly, instead telling the Texas senator that “President Trump has made clear his desire to achieve a lasting resolution to the problem in the Western Sahara, to that dispute, and as part of that American policy currently, we are engaging all parties.”

Cruz went on to ask Palladino if he believed the PF posed a threat to U.S. interests, to which the NEA official replied, “We’re actively engaging all parties in the Western Sahara dispute in the interest of achieving a lasting and durable peace. That’s the policy of the president. We’re seeking more time to continue to find a way to find common ground and to come to an agreement to stabilize the situation and allow there to be prosperity to follow based upon stability.”

The Texas senator told Palladino that his answers were “positively Shakespearean. It was full of sound and fury and yet signifying nothing.”

Cruz then turned to Borkert, the deputy coordinator for programs and military coordination at the Bureau of Counterterrorism, who similarly declined to single out the PF by name. 

“We continue to monitor activities throughout North Africa,” Borkert said. “We continue to see the IRGC and Hezbollah, their activities in that region and globally, and as we look at these activities, we will work with our partner countries in order to counter those threats, and where possible, designate or encourage those countries to designate the IRGC, Hezbollah and those terrorist groups.”

Both men told Cruz that they were not instructed to exclude mentions of the PF in their testimony. Cruz later revealed he did not believe their claims.

“I believe both witnesses were instructed: Do not say a negative word about the Polisario Front,” Cruz said on his podcast that evening. “They were instructed to say nothing about the Polisario Front.”

“The administration is trying to negotiate a big peace deal in Africa. There are folks in the administration who are trying to negotiate a deal in Western Africa, and right now, one of the consequences of that is that they’re reluctant to call out the Polisario Front,” he explained. “I think the Polisario Front is really dangerous. They’re funded by Iran, and so I’m working to call out people who are enemies of America and to impose real costs and consequences on those jihadists that are enemies of America.”

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), who is among the most vocal Democratic supporters of Israel in the House, will serve as the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East and North Africa subcommittee beginning Friday, replacing Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL) following her indictment earlier this week.

As per House Democratic rules, Cherfilus-McCormick surrendered her subcommittee leadership role after being indicted by the Justice Department this week, on allegations that she used misallocated federal disaster funds for personal expenses and to support her campaign.

Sherman was the most senior Democrat on the subcommittee. He had previously declined to pursue leadership of the subcommittee given that he is also the top Democrat on a House Financial Services subcommittee, and would have needed to surrender that post. 

But Democratic rules now allow him to temporarily hold both leadership posts concurrently; Cherfilus-McCormick will resume the Foreign Affairs role if she is acquitted or charges are dropped.

“My views on the Middle East are well known to the readers of Jewish Insider,” Sherman told JI. “I am pleased to serve as the chief Democrat on the House-Knesset Parliamentary Friendship Group and as a Co-Chair of the House Israel Allies Caucus. I particularly want to focus on making sure that any Saudi nuclear program does not lead to a Saudi nuclear weapon. Likewise, I’m concerned about the possibility of transferring F-35 jets to Saudi Arabia.”

Democratic leadership on the subcommittee has been through repeated changes in recent years. Sherman is the fifth Democrat to lead it since 2022: former Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL) stepped down when he retired from Congress to lead the American Jewish Committee, former Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) also stepped down when he left Congress in 2023 and Rep. Dean Phillips (D-MN) declined to run for re-election in 2024.