Lawmakers and expert witnesses pushed back at a Helsinki Commission hearing on Tuesday on efforts to reimpose sanctions on the Syrian government for its assault against the Kurds and other minorities, and pushed for the U.S. to facilitate a diplomatic arrangement between Israel and Turkey that would allow for a greater Turkish presence in Syria — in part as a counterweight to Russia.

Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) introduced legislation last week to reimpose sanctions on the Syrian government, in response to Damascus’ attacks on the Kurds, which for years had been backed by the U.S. as the minority group fought the Islamic State.

Meanwhile, Israel has remained deeply skeptical of the new Syrian government and is resistant to an expanded Turkish presence in Syria, given Ankara’s open hostility toward Israel in recent years, which has included threats to invade, and ambitions for regional dominance.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and leading advocate for sanctions repeal in the Senate, criticized colleagues who were pushing to re-impose sanctions, arguing that the repeal of the sanctions has been “successful,” suggesting that their reimposition would push Syria into Russia’s hands.

“The empirical record shows that countries that we’ve sanctioned and tried to coerce, if they are strong enough, will bandwagon, will hedge against us, try to find other patrons,” Richard Outzen, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, said. “That’s how Russia has a back door here.”

The hearing was focused primarily on finding ways to counter the Russian presence in Syria.

Outzen asserted that sanctions would not lead to the results their advocates seek, but rather renewed violence and fragmentation.

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), a champion in the House for sanctions repeal, said he hopes to see any remaining sanctions, including Syria’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism, repealed as well.

Witnesses at the hearing noted that Russia is taking steps to entrench its presence and expand its relationship with the Syrian government, and that Syria remains heavily reliant on Russia. They largely called for increased engagement and incentives for the new Syrian government to counter Russia rather than coercive measures.

“The way to not abandon the Kurds is to not abandon Damascus. The best way to do that is to remain engaged and provide pathways to regional roles for Turkey and others, and not to give in to voices that say, we can’t trust [Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa],” Outzen said.

Asked about whether al-Sharaa can be trusted to protect minorities in Syria, Outzen argued that the bigger issue is whether he has the ability to control his own forces, given that many in al-Sharaa’s ranks are jihadists.

“The greatest way to protect [minorities] is to institutionalize and reform the Syrian military. That comes with a stabilized state, and frankly, probably comes with the U.S. providing oversight, whether that’s U.S. forces or contract mechanisms to insist on reforms so that the sort of people that have been responsible for atrocities fighting on that side are weeded out quickly, and, if they’re not Syrians, are sent out of the country,” Outzen said.

Michael Doran, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, likewise said that al-Sharaa’s “biggest problem … more than whatever he has in his heart — he has a cadre of people around him who are quite happy to go out and slaughter minorities. And they need to be kept on a short leash, and they need to be trained up,” he continued.

Doran described Turkey as the “key partner” in helping to build and professionalize the Syrian military.

Wilson expressed support for an expanded Turkish military presence in Syria as a path to removing Russian bases from Syria. He said he wants to see a deal between Turkey and Israel to facilitate that goal.

“Sadly, some in Israel prefer a weak and divided Syria and view an extended Russian presence as a buffer against Turkey. I believe this is suicidal for Israel,” Wilson said. “This will only be possible if Israel and Turkey deescalate and reach a detente in Syria.”

Wilson said that it was “startling to me” that Israel saw a Russian presence in Syria as a counterweight to Turkey.

“Our ability to expel the Russians from Syria, in the end, is going to be dependent on our ability to strike a balance between the Turks and the Israelis, and this is going to take a very sustained commitment on our part,” Doran agreed.

“I think the American leadership in pulling the Turks and the Israelis together and encouraging them, almost forcing them to talk to each other, is, I think, the starting point for solving this problem,” Doran said.

“I think the greatest fear of Israelis, more than the ideological onslaught of the Islamists against Israel and the Syrian minorities, is that Syria will become a Turkish military base — the front lines in an effort to annihilate Israel,” he continued. “I think we have a major role to play here, in getting the two sides to come to an accommodation.”

He said he wants to see Syria become a “buffer state” between Turkey and Israel, comparing it to Jordan as a buffer between Israel and Iraq.

Outzen said that outreach will be needed to the Israeli government to push back on their approach, bring together Israeli and Turkish security officials and emphasize Turkey’s role as a NATO ally and a close partner of the Trump administration — in spite of Israel’s own deep concerns about Turkey’s regional ambitions.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced legislation on Wednesday to condemn the Israeli government for allegedly withholding aid in Gaza and to potentially impose sanctions on Israeli government officials.

Under the Accountability for Withholding Aid and Relief Essentials (AWARE) Act, any foreign government officials or those acting on their behalf “found to be restricting, diminishing, undermining, or preventing the delivery and distribution of sufficient humanitarian assistance” would be subject to U.S. financial and visa-blocking sanctions.

The legislation includes a presidential waiver, though that, or the removal of sanctions, can be overridden by a joint resolution of disapproval by Congress. Senior lawmakers would also be allowed to request an assessment of whether a foreign official meets the criteria for sanctions.

The policy would apply globally, but is formulated around the situation in Gaza.

The legislation states that the entire population of Gaza is “facing acute levels of hunger” and that “actual levels of humanitarian assistance remain well below what is needed,” though a U.N. report last week stated that 100% of Gaza’s basic food needs, for the first time since 2023, are now being met.

“The United States must send a clear message to [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu and any other leader who would deny food, medicine, and shelter to vulnerable people: If you are complicit in denying humanitarian assistance to Palestinians or others in need, you will face personal consequences,” Wyden said.

Wyden, who is Jewish, has generally not been a prominent critic of Israel in the Senate, and did not vote with a majority of his Democratic colleagues last year to block certain weapons shipments to Israel.

“As Jews, we have a duty to moral leadership. Netanyahu has failed this duty by all counts,” he continued. “As a lifelong champion for Israel’s security, I believe the actions of the Netanyahu government have made Jews less safe and contributed to horrific suffering in Gaza.”

Under the legislation, the administration would also be required to report annually to Congress on any officials violating the policy and justify any case in which sanctions were not imposed — or to explain their reasoning if they fail to add any individuals to the list.

It further states that it will be U.S. policy that “if a government is unable or unwilling to ensure delivery and distribution of sufficient humanitarian assistance to a territory under its control, that government must allow any and all United States and internationally recognized humanitarian organizations to deliver and distribute sufficient humanitarian assistance to the protected persons in that territory.”

Various international NGOs, including Doctors Without Borders (MSF), that are cited in the bill text, as well as the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, have been found by Israel and researchers to have employed members of Hamas and other terrorist groups. Israel recently banned MSF and other international NGOs because they refused to provide information about their staff for vetting.

The legislation condemns both Hamas and Iran, while also condemning Israel for restricting aid flows into Gaza, stating, “actions by the Netanyahu administration that have contributed to the humanitarian crisis and acute suffering of Palestinians are horrifying” and that the Israeli government’s actions are “not consistent with the State of Israel’s core values” and have “eroded the State of Israel’s standing in the world by undermining the rule of law and violating fundamental human rights.”

The legislation is supported by the Friends Committee on National Legislation, New Jewish Narrative, J Street and Refugees International.

“Our Jewish values compel us to stand up against the continued oppressive restrictions on humanitarian aid into Gaza, which exacerbate the destruction inflicted on civilians by two years of war,” J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami said in a statement. “At a time when humanitarian groups are facing increasing obstacles to providing help on the ground, those who intentionally restrict access to humanitarian assistance must face real consequences.

“Humanitarian aid should never be used as a weapon of war. Nor should the suffering of a people be exploited for diplomatic leverage,” NJN CEO Hadar Susskind said. “Unfortunately, the current Israeli government has a demonstrable record of doing just that. Gazans continue to suffer to this day. By introducing this bill, Senator Wyden is reasserting American values, and backing them up with real consequences.”

A group of 136 House Republicans released a joint statement on Friday calling for increased oversight of and accountability from Syria, days after voting to repeal the last major sanctions package on the country as part of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act.

The Trump administration had pushed Congress to repeal the so-called Caesar Act sanctions, an action finalized when Trump signed the 2026 NDAA Thursday evening, but some lawmakers on the Hill have harbored continued reservations about the new government in Syria and ensuring it continues to make progress on democracy building.

The statement indicates that a significant number of Republican lawmakers remain concerned about the Syrian government’s conduct going forward. It follows an attack by ISIS affiliates who also reportedly had ties to the Syrian government that killed two U.S. service members and a civilian interpreter in Syria last weekend. The statement has been in the works since last week, shortly after the House voted to pass the NDAA, a source familiar with the situation told Jewish Insider.

“Bringing religious freedom into Syria is the only way the country will fully stabilize. The sanctions repealed by the NDAA will help economically, but violence will not cease until [Syrian President Ahmad] al-Sharaa uses his position to denounce religiously motivated attacks,” Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), a co-lead of the joint statement, told Jewish Insider.

The lawmakers, led by Stutzman and Rep. Josh Brecheen (R-OK), said in the joint statement that members of Congress interested in protecting religious minorities in the region “worked with the Trump Administration and House leadership to secure assurances that snapback conditions … would be enforced if Syria does not comply with the terms highlighted in the repeal language.”

The NDAA includes language calling for the administration to reimpose sanctions on Syria if a variety of human rights, security and anti-corruption conditions are not met, and for reporting to Congress on those benchmarks — but the language is not binding and the strict and sweeping Caesar Act sanctions could not be reimposed by executive authority without another act of Congress.

The lawmakers said that the “the mass murder of the Syrian Christians, Druze, Alawites, Kurds, and other religious and ethnic minorities must be a thing of the past” and that they are “committed to keeping a watchful eye on the new al-Sharaa Administration to ensure protections for religious and ethnic minorities.”

They said they would like to travel to Syria to see firsthand that religious protections are being upheld, particularly in Suweida, the city with a substantial Druze population where government-aligned forces carried out mass atrocities earlier this year.

“We look forward to confirming that these terms have not been squandered by the Syrian government — whether by their president or by rogue military officials — and seeing for ourselves that the al-Sharaa Administration has created a safe environment for the religious and ethnic minorities historically persecuted in the region,” the statement continued.

The lawmakers also said that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL) had agreed to hold a hearing on “the verified change of treatment for religious minorities in Syria.”

Mast himself, who had been the last major roadblock on the Hill to sanctions repeal and pushed for the nonbinding snapback language to be included, is one of the first signatories on the statement.

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement that the “unconditional” sanctions repeal is a significant step, while highlighting the congressional oversight and monitoring obligations.

“After long and serious consideration, we have worked closely with the Trump Administration to responsibly repeal the Caesar Act, which played an important role in the fall of the Assad Regime,” Risch said. “This unconditional repeal removes a significant roadblock to U.S. and international commercial investments in Syria. It also increases reporting and monitoring on benchmarks such as ethnic and religious persecution to ensure Syria remains on the path to becoming a U.S. partner that makes America safer, stronger, and more prosperous.”

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom held a hearing with Syrian minority group leaders last month, where representatives of the Syrian Druze, Christian and Alawite communities warned of systemic religious persecution by the new government and urged Congress to place conditions on the repeal of sanctions.

But others, including the Jewish Heritage in Syria Foundation (JHS), a group of U.S.-based Syrian Jews working to restore Jewish sites and relics in Syria, celebrated the sanctions repeal.

“Once President Trump signs the bill into law, we will be able to increase our efforts to preserve Jewish heritage, continue the search for those we have lost, and move forward with healing and restoration,” JHS said in a statement. “We can now begin rebuilding our synagogues, especially the ancient and historic Jobar Synagogue, one of the oldest Jewish sites in the world.”

Other leaders in the Syrian Jewish community have distanced themselves from the leadership of JHS and its affiliates, claiming they do not speak for the Syrian Jewish community in the U.S. at large.

A new bipartisan and bicameral bill is pushing for greater accountability and transparency on China’s violations of U.S. oil sanctions on Iran.

China is the largest importer of Iranian oil, in spite of the sweeping U.S. sanctions regime targeting the Iranian oil and gas industry, as well as newer sanctions that target importers of that oil, which have been recently applied to some firms in China. 

Recent reports by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies have found that Iran oil exports, primarily to China, have remained near their peak level in spite of U.S. sanctions, which FDD has attributed to a “failure of U.S. sanctions enforcement.”

The new bill, led by Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) and Ben Cline (R-VA), requires the administration, within a year of the bill’s passage, to determine whether the People’s Republic of China is conducting sanctionable activities with regard to Iran.

In advance of that determination, the bill requires the administration to report to Congress within 180 days on China’s purchases of Iranian oil, including how China is using shell companies and other methods to dodge sanctions, as well as on Chinese efforts to sell or transfer chemical precursors to Iran to support its ballistic missile program.

Recent reports have found that Iran has been importing materials from China to rebuild its ballistic missile program, an effort that has prompted concern on Capitol Hill.

“China’s growing purchases of Iranian oil and its support for Iran’s ballistic missile program are not just violations of U.S. sanctions—they are direct threats to regional stability and to our allies,” Krishnamoorthi said in a statement, adding that the legislation “gives Congress the intelligence and transparency needed to expose how the PRC enables Iran’s most dangerous activities.”

“By bringing these transactions into the light, we strengthen our ability to enforce sanctions and hold malign actors accountable,” Krishnamoorthi continued.

Krishnamoorthi is mounting a bid for the U.S. Senate in his home state.

“China’s continued purchases of Iranian oil and its role in enabling Iran’s missile program to pose a direct threat to U.S. national security and to the stability of our allies in the Middle East,” Cline said. He called the legislation and the reporting it requires “a necessary step toward exposing how the PRC uses shell companies, transshipment schemes, and other avenues to evade sanctions.” 

“This report will give Congress and the Treasury Department the insight needed to strengthen enforcement, close loopholes, and ensure that hostile regimes, and those who bankroll them, are held accountable,” Cline continued.

Blumenthal said that China’s purchases of oil are “providing significant financial support for Iran’s terrorist activities in the Middle East and beyond.”

“Transparency is the first step towards accountability, which is why our bill would require a full report on China’s oil and ballistic missile-related transactions with Iran. This information will support robust sanctions enforcement and provide a path forward for additional legislative action,” Blumenthal said.

Graham called the bill “the first step in fully understanding how China and other nations prop up the Ayatollah’s war machine.”

The final version of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act negotiated by Senate and House leaders includes a full and unconditional repeal of U.S. sanctions on Syria under the Caesar Civilian Protection Act, as well as a repeal of the war authorizations that allowed for the Iraq war and the first Gulf War.

The Caesar sanctions repeal comes in spite of hesitation from some lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who argued that the sanctions should remain on the books, with relief contingent on the Syrian government meeting various benchmarks. Supporters of full sanctions relief have argued that it’s necessary in order to put Syria on a more predictable and stable financial footing and provide confidence to foreign investors to support reconstruction projects.

Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who had been skeptical of the prospect of unconditional repeal, ultimately decided to provide his approval to include it in the bill.

The legislation requires the administration to report to Congress twice per year to certify whether the Syrian government is complying with a range of U.S. priorities, including cooperating with counter-ISIS efforts, removing foreign fighters from the Syrian government, protecting minority rights, non-aggression toward Israel, integrating the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic forces, complying with U.S. sanctions, prosecuting human rights abusers and combating narcotics production.

It includes a nonbinding provision that “the president may consider whether to impose targeted sanctions on individuals under existing authorities” if these conditions are not met for two reporting periods, but includes no binding snapback provisions mandating the reimposition of sanctions.

The repeal of the Iraq war authorization has been a longtime priority for lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, but others have argued that a more deliberative approach is needed to ensure that the U.S. maintains its ability to target Iranian proxies or terrorist groups in Iraq.

Largely outside of Middle East policy, the legislation contains a number of provisions seemingly aimed at countering isolationist pushes from within the administration, including provisions to ensure that U.S. aid to Ukraine continues and that the U.S. does not significantly draw down its troop presence in Europe or South Korea.

It also includes a provision seemingly aimed at responding to senators’ public concerns about a lack of transparency and communication by Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby, mandating that he personally brief Congress twice next year about the national defense strategy.

Overall, the bill proposes a defense budget $8 billion above the Trump administration’s 2026 request — though any actual funding allocations will have to be approved separately through the still-pending appropriations process.

Within the Middle East domain, the NDAA authorizes annual funding for joint missile-defense programs with Israel, including Iron Dome, David’s Sling and Arrow, guaranteed under the memorandum of understanding with Israel that lasts through 2028. 

The explanatory report accompanying the bill requires the administration to brief Congress on Israel’s current Arrow stockpiles — systems that saw heavy use during Iran’s ballistic missile attacks on Israel earlier this year — including potential obstacles to increasing Arrow production capacity and inventory and the possibility of creating “fully redundant Arrow production capacity in the United States.”

Addressing existing regional air- and missile-defense cooperation programs, the report directs the administration to brief Congress on progress toward an integrated air and missile architecture, as well as lessons learned during the past two years of war in the Middle East and the impacts of existing cooperation efforts during that time.

It also requires the Pentagon to brief Congress on any delays in providing aircraft or air-launched munitions to Israel and the “feasibility and advisability” of providing Israel with American systems to fill those gaps in the interim.

The NDAA proposes increasing funding for joint U.S.-Israel anti-tunnelling programs to $80 million, a $30 million increase. The report requires the administration to study potential steps to secure the border between Egypt and Gaza to cut down on smuggling into the enclave via tunnels, drones and the Mediterranean Sea.

The legislation also expands existing U.S.-Israel cooperative programs countering airborne drone threats to include other unmanned systems, including sea- and land-based drones, and proposes funding of $70 million, a $15 million increase.

It extends both the counter-tunnel and counter-drone programs through 2028.

The bill also proposes providing $35 million for a new program to pursue military applications of emerging technologies such as AI, quantum computing and cybersecurity in cooperation with allies like Israel.

The legislation also directs the administration to create a U.S.-Israel Defense Industrial Base Working Group to expand defense production cooperation with Israel, and study the possibility of integrating Israel into the National Technology and Industrial Base, alongside other key U.S. allies.

The explanatory report directs the Defense Department to consider creating a “regional outreach center” of the Defense Innovation Unit in Israel; the House draft of the NDAA had included a requirement that the Pentagon establish such an office.The DIU is a relatively new Pentagon unit with offices around the U.S. that works to allow the military to more quickly adopt emerging commercial technologies.

In an effort to address international boycotts and other punitive measures against Israel, the NDAA requires the administration to continually assess the impact of arms embargoes, sanctions and other restrictions imposed on Israel and the ways the U.S. might be able to mitigate those impacts.

The explanatory report instructs the Pentagon to avoid participating in international arms exhibitions that exclude Israeli companies.

But the final NDAA does not include a provision from the House draft of the bill instructing the administration to engage with top allies to ensure they do not enforce International Criminal Court arrest warrants against the U.S. or Israel.

The report states that the U.S. should engage in “regular military exercises of increasing complexity” with Israel, to include “other regional partners as well when feasible,” and requires the administration to report to Congress on such exercises.

In an effort to address growing cooperation among Iran, China, Russia and North Korea, the legislation instructs the administration to establish a whole-of-government effort to respond to such alliances, including establishing working groups in several Cabinet agencies, charged with providing recommendations to the administration and Congress.

The NDAA expands existing required reports on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, mandating the administration provide additional information to Congress about Iran’s support to its terrorist proxies, its nuclear advancements and its production of new weapons systems like single-use drones.

It further requires prompt notification to Congress if the intelligence community finds that Iran has made the decision to produce a nuclear weapon from its stockpiles of highly enriched uranium.

The bill also includes a new authority permitting the U.S. to quickly send weapons seized in transit from Iran to the Houthis to U.S. allies, potentially including Israel and Ukraine.

The NDAA instructs the administration to create a strategy for expanding U.S. security partnerships with Jordan and Lebanon, including working to ensure the disarmament of Hezbollah. It requires the Defense Department to set out benchmarks for cutting off support to the Lebanese Armed Forces if they fail to make progress in or are unwilling to disarm Hezbollah.

The legislation also includes a provision to withhold 25% of U.S. security assistance to Iraq until the administration certifies that the Iraqi government is taking steps to weaken Iran-aligned militia groups in Iraq and remove members of Iran-aligned groups operating as part of the Iraqi security forces, though the secretary of defense can waive those conditions.

And it requires the administration to declassify all documents related to the Iranian proxy attack on the U.S.’ Tower 22 Facility in Jordan in January 2024, which killed three U.S. service members.

Matching an executive order from the Trump administration, the legislation codifies a new designation and sanctions regime for countries engaging in wrongful detention of U.S. citizens, with a requirement that the State Department report to Congress on whether Iran should be so designated.

In addition to the Caesar Act repeal, other Syria-related provisions in the bill require the administration to report to Congress on the possibility and security concerns involved in reopening the U.S. embassy in Damascus, the U.S.’ force posture in Syria and any planned changes to U.S. forces in the country. 

It does not include a more stringent provision from the Senate version of the bill requiring the Pentagon to certify that drawing down U.S. forces in Syria would not compromise U.S. priorities.

The NDAA also provides continued authorization for the U.S. to assist vetted Syrian groups in combating terrorism in the country.

The bill additionally mandates that the Defense Department report to Congress on the possibility of expanding the Comprehensive Security Integration and Prosperity Agreement — an economic and security pact with Bahrain — to include other countries.

And it requires the administration to develop a plan to counter foreign efforts to “continue or expand” the civil war in Sudan.

The legislation does not include a House-proposed provision extending through 2029 the authorization — currently set to lapse on Jan. 1, 2027 — for the U.S. weapons stockpile in Israel, which Israel can tap into in emergencies. 

It also excludes House provisions that aimed to tackle Hezbollah’s operations in South America and to encourage defections by senior Iranian officials. A House provision awarding medals to those servicemembers involved in the U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June was not included either.
Other provisions from the House draft of the bill relating to antisemitism, including prohibiting Department of Defense funding for schools that failed to take action against antisemitic demonstrations, and requiring reports on antisemitism in the Pentagon and transnational antisemitic extremism, were also excluded.

A full repeal of human rights sanctions on Syria under the Caesar Civilian Protection Act is likely to pass Congress as part of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, after House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL) signed off on the measure, according to a source familiar with the matter.

The NDAA, which Congress aims to finalize in early December after its Thanksgiving recess, will include a full repeal of the sanctions, but also a nonbinding provision urging the administration to reimpose sanctions on Syria if its new government does not meet certain human rights conditions, the source told Jewish Insider. Barring any unexpected developments, the provision should be on track to pass Congress in the must-pass legislation.

The Senate approved similar provisions in its version of the NDAA earlier this year, but the House version of the bill included no such language, and Mast’s approval was needed to incorporate the provision into the final version of the bill being negotiated between both chambers.

President Donald Trump has been urging Congress to repeal the sanctions, an effort supported by many Syrian diaspora activists, including Rabbi Yosef Hamra, the brother of the country’s last chief rabbi, who now lives in the U.S.

But others, including activists from other Syrian minority communities and some lawmakers, have argued that the sanctions should remain on the books to provide leverage and accountability to ensure the protection of minorities and the Syrian government’s cooperation on other matters like counterterrorism.

Mast had been skeptical of lifting sanctions, but indicated to JI his position was softening last week. He met earlier this month with Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa in Washington.

Mast told The Hill, which was first to report the news, that his position is that the sanctions should be, “Fully repealed, to have mechanisms, or rather a sentiment that sanctions should be reinstituted if a number of conditions are not met. … Still fully repealed.”

The Treasury Department implemented new sanctions on Thursday targeting what the agency described as a “network of front companies and shipping facilitators that bankroll the Iranian armed forces by selling crude oil” — a critical revenue stream for the regime.

The latest round of sanctions, one of several announced in recent months, also targets six vessels in Iran’s “shadow fleet” of tankers used to transport oil to international markets, joining a list of more than 170 such vessels which have been sanctioned this year.

The Treasury is also adding sanctions on a subsidiary of Mahan Air, an Iranian airline used by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to help supply proxies and allies across the region.

“Today’s action continues Treasury’s campaign to cut off funding for the Iranian regime’s development of nuclear weapons and support of terrorist proxies,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement. “Disrupting the Iranian regime’s revenue is critical to helping curb its nuclear ambitions.”

In its announcement, the Treasury Department said that Iran’s oil exports are a crucial source of funding for the Iranian regime, particularly as the Islamic Republic seeks to rebuild after its war with Israel.

“Following its defeat in the 12-Day War with Israel, Iran’s military has increasingly come to rely on the sale of Iranian crude oil to supplement its annual budget and finance the rebuilding of its depleted forces,” the statement reads.

The companies targeted under the sanctions are tied to Sepehr Energy Jahan Nama Pars Company, an arm of the Iranian military responsible for oil sales and exports. The companies being targeted operated variously out of the UAE, Panama, Greece, India and Liberia.

The ships in question are flagged in Palau, Panama and Gambia.

According to the Treasury’s announcement, Mahan subsidiary Yazd International Airways Company was used by the IRGC to transport Quds Force officers to Lebanon to support Hezbollah attacks on Israel and to ship weapons to the Assad regime in Syria. 

The sanctions also seek to crack down on Mahan’s procurement of Western aircraft and identify several such aircraft as blocked property.

Bessent also attended a meeting at the White House on Thursday with recently freed hostages.

“We heard their firsthand accounts of the atrocities experienced on that day and over the past two years,” Bessent said on X. “Thanks to President Trump’s historic actions and bold leadership, all of the hostages have been freed, and we are closer than ever to a lasting peace in the Middle East. At @USTreasury, we are committed to safeguarding Americans and our allies from terror, wherever it presents.”

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL) told Jewish Insider that, after his meeting with Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa earlier this week, he’s going to “think about” his skeptical stance on the repeal of sanctions on Syria under the Caesar Civilian Protection Act. 

Mast has previously expressed concerns about lifting the sanctions, a move which the Trump administration supports.

The Senate approved the repeal of the Caesar Act as part of its draft of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, but the House has not yet approved similar legislation. Mast would need to approve the Senate proposal for it to be included in the final defense bill. He told The Hill last week that “discussions on Caesar Repeal are ongoing but my concerns should be obvious to anyone following the situation in Syria.”

The House Financial Services Committee voted on a bipartisan basis in July for legislation conditioning the lifting of the sanctions on Syria meeting a series of human rights, anti-corruption and counterterrorism standards.

Asked if the meeting had changed his views on the issue, Mast said that he had read at length about al-Sharaa and his background — al-Sharaa is a former terrorist commander affiliated with ISIS and Al-Qaida — prior to the meeting. Mast is a military veteran who lost his legs to a terrorist bombing in Afghanistan.

“We had a lot of conversation, good conversation,” Mast said. “I asked him very pointedly [to] explain why we’re no longer his enemy. He gave a pretty good answer. Said he was hoping for a noble future for his people, one free of radicalism, fundamentalism … and ISIS. So it was a good answer.”

Opponents of the full repeal effort argue that sanctions should remain on the books to ensure Syrian compliance with U.S. priorities and human rights, particularly in light of the massacres of religious minority groups.

The Senate approved the repeal of strict sanctions legislation targeting the now-deposed Assad regime in Syria, as part of its version of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have been working to repeal or roll back the sanctions, known as the Caesar Act, for several months, though the effort is not without some opponents.

The chamber also passed, as part of a bipartisan package of amendments, an amendment led by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) — opposed by some Syrian-American activists — that requires regular reports to Congress certifying Syria’s compliance with a variety of U.S. priorities and urges the administration to reimpose sanctions if such verification cannot be completed.

The House version of the NDAA does not include a similar provision, so whether the sanctions repeal is included in the final bill, and in what form, will be subject to negotiations between the two chambers. Legislation placing a variety of conditions on the suspension of the Caesar Act, rather than repealing the sanctions, has gained momentum in the House.

The Senate also approved, by voice vote, an amendment that would repeal the Authorizations for Use of Military Force that allowed for the Iraq and Gulf wars. With similar provisions included in the House version of the bill, the repeal of those war authorizations, a long-term goal of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, looks increasingly likely this year.

Opponents have argued that the process has moved too quickly and with too little deliberation and consultation with the administration, and that repealing the authorities could jeopardize counterterrorism operations.

The upper chamber rejected an amendment that would have barred the modification of a Qatari-donated jumbo jet to serve as Air Force One, by a party-line vote of 50 to 46.

Other provisions added to the legislation in bipartisan amendment packages include programs aimed at countering foreign information manipulation and interference by adversaries like Iran; a study of the potential security conditions for reopening the U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria; and legislation aimed at countering the wrongful detentions of U.S. citizens by adversaries like Iran by creating a new designation and penalties for countries engaging in such activity.

The legislation also expands and modifies various U.S.-Israel cooperative military programs.

A debate is quietly simmering in Washington over the prospect of repealing congressionally mandated sanctions on Syria, an effort that has bipartisan support — but is not without its opponents.

As part of the Senate’s ongoing consideration of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, a provision was included in a bipartisan consensus package of amendments that would fully repeal the Caesar Act, a strict sanctions framework imposed in response to the Assad regime’s human rights violations. Should the NDAA move forward on the Senate floor, the amendment is almost certain to pass. 

The sanctions are currently being waived by the Trump administration, but can only be permanently repealed, before their 2029 expiration date, by Congress.

Some on Capitol Hill are pushing for a more cautious approach, keeping the sanctions on the books, at least in the short term, while pushing for the Syrian government, led by former Al-Qaida commander Ahmad al-Sharaa, to abide by a series of conditions in exchange for continued waiving of the sanctions.

Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) introduced a series of amendments to the Senate NDAA taking such an approach. The first would suspend the sanctions but keep them sanctions on the books indefinitely, past 2029, and require compliance with a series of conditions to keep the sanctions paused. 

A second, updated amendment would keep the sanctions on the books for the next four years and would recommend but not require the reimposition of sanctions if the conditions in question are not met.

The Graham-Van Hollen amendment is unlikely to have sufficient support to pass the Senate. 

A similar debate is playing out in the House, where the Financial Services Committee voted to advance a bill, led by Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), that would condition the lifting of sanctions, over the objections of lawmakers who have called for immediate and unconditional relief.

Activists in the Syrian-American diaspora community, including Rabbi Yosef Hamra, the brother of the last chief rabbi of Syria, who now resides in Brooklyn, are calling for Congress to reject efforts to condition sanctions relief, and want lawmakers to fully repeal the Caesar Act as quickly as possible.

Hamra, in a letter to congressional offices on behalf of the Jewish Heritage in Syria Foundation that was shared with Jewish Insider, expressed “grave concern” about the original Graham proposal, saying it would endanger Syrian Jews and prevent their ability to rebuild their community.

“This measure would put in place snapback provisions which would extend the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act indefinitely, including provisions harsher than those applied during the Assad regime’s worst atrocities,” Hamra wrote. “Lifting the Caesar sanctions is essential to restore synagogues and cemeteries, safeguard irreplaceable Jewish heritage and re-establish a mutli-faith community in Syria after more than 30 years in exile. Simply put, this amendment would be devastating to the Jewish community in Syria.”

Hamra noted that members of the Syrian Jewish community have begun to return to the country and work to rebuild and restore Jewish sites and artifacts, which he said requires “a stable, predictable policy environment that encourages investment, cultural preservation, and the safe return of refugees.”

He argued that the sanctions “should be completely repealed with no risk of snapping back. Any attempt to prevent this law from being completely repealed without risk of snapback would be a disaster” by discouraging support for projects inside the country, which he said would halt efforts to rebuild.

Henry Hamra, the son of the rabbi, told JI he also rejects the updated Graham-Van Hollen amendment.

“A watered down amendment by Senator Graham has the same chilling effect and damage of any amendment that requires conditions and threatens snapback sanctions of any kind,” Henry Hamra said in a statement to JI. “That’s why the Jewish Syrian community in the United States supports a clean repeal of the Caesar Act with no conditions it is the right and moral thing to do.”

Henry Hamra told JI that extensive work is needed to restore old synagogues, Torah scrolls and other artifacts that have been long neglected and added, “We need all the sanctions to be lifted to help us out.”

A source supporting the repeal effort said Treasury officials told Congress that keeping the Caesar Act — which includes mandatory secondary sanctions provisions on individuals doing business with those sanctioned — on the books in any form, even if the sanctions are being waived, has created an environment of uncertainty that has made foreign countries and businesses unwilling to invest in long-term development and reconstruction efforts in Syria.

“This is more than a two-year or a short-term thing to rebuild the whole neighborhood, [it] would take years. American companies, too, by the way, are interested in working in Syria. As long as Caesar is an authority, and there’s snapback for it, people will be wary to do that,” Mouaz Moustafa, the executive director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force, told JI. “And the progress, including on some of the conditions that are being placed, itself, would be stifled if [the] Caesar Act remains in perpetuity.”

Moustafa’s group is also opposing any action short of full Caesar repeal, and argues that anything less would be a punishment to the Syrian people.

A spokesperson for AIPAC told JI that the organization “do[es] not oppose the lifting of the Caesar sanctions but believe[s] Congress should make clear its expectations for the new Syrian government and lay out the conditions under which sanctions could be reimposed.”

John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America and a national security advisor to former Vice President Dick Cheney told JI he opposes the sanctions repeal, and that he favors a conditional approach like that outlined in the Lawler bill.

Hannah said that there is “some significant evidence” that Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa is willing to engage on U.S. security priorities which justifies some easing of sanctions, “but our big concern is that the administration has had kind of a blind spot on internal matters in Syria with regards to governance and particularly with the relationship of Damascus to the key minority groups, some of them quite well armed.”

He warned that Syria’s future is being “undermined” by internal governance issues, including what he described as an “Islamist, Sunni-supremacist” and “highly centralized, authoritarian” approach to statebuilding by al-Sharaa, and by the two high-profile massacres of religious minority groups in recent months.

“[Al-Sharaa] has shown himself to be a ruthless pragmatist and I think the U.S. has just got to use the significant leverage it does have and continues to have, which is primarily wrapped in Caesar — to apply that equally as effectively as we have on the security priority to a set of priorities about the process of internal governance in Syria,” Hannah said. He argued that the U.S. should not “just surrender that prematurely, particularly after these extraordinary levels of violence we’ve seen inside of Syria that are completely undermining the possibility of a stable, cooperative Syrian partner to the United States.”

He warned that al-Sharaa’s “particular vision of Syria” is the greatest risk and potential driver of another collapse and devolution back into civil war in Syria — more so than the potential impacts of sanctions, as argued by proponents of sanctions relief. “We can’t tolerate another 1,500-person massacre of some minority inside of Syria. I think it’ll break the country,” Hannah added.

He said the U.S. should condition sanctions relief on legitimate dialogue and efforts to include and protect minorities, including Druze and Alawites, Western involvement in training and professionalizing the Syrian military and the expulsion of foreign jihadists from the Syrian government. Under such conditions, he said he’d be supportive of repealing Caesar in two years, ahead of its current expiration in 2029.

Hannah said that by making clear the U.S. is “fully committed to continuing to issue waivers,” as long as “we see a sustained level of progress here,” it should provide “sufficient green lights” to wealthy Arab states and others to begin ramping up investments.

He also urged the U.S. to work with regional and European allies to develop a joint approach and outreach strategy for Syria, and said that the time is not right for the U.S. to remove its remaining military forces from the country and surrender the leverage those troops provide.

Correction: Rabbi Yosef Hamra is the brother of the last chief rabbi of Syria. A previous version of the story identified Hamra as his nephew.

Senate and House lawmakers met Thursday with Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani, in the first trip by a Syrian government official to the Congress in decades.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said that their meeting was “very encouraging and constructive.”

“I think we are on a path to eliminate sanctions in a way that safeguards interests of other nations in the region, and at the same time, provides for reconstruction in Syria, in a way that negates the influence of Iran and Russia,” Blumenthal said.

He said there was broad, but inconclusive, discussion about talks between the Syrian and Israeli governments.

Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ), who worked on Syria and Middle East issues at the State Department, called the trip “historic.” This was his first meeting with officials from the new Syrian government.

“He very much expressed a deep interest in being able to work as partners with us to stand up against ISIS, to stop Iranian reach and meddling throughout the Middle East, to push back on Russian interference,” Kim said. “There’s something really serious here that we need to engage with, and see how we can play a role. I worry that if we miss this opportunity, it could be a long time before we see a chance to be able to reshape the Middle East in a way for greater peace.”

He likewise said that al-Shaibani had said that the Syrian government has had extensive negotiations with Israel and suggested that they had been “positive conversations,” but that no agreements had been reached.

Regarding sanctions, Kim said that al-Shaibani had been “helpful in explaining how these restrictions are hurting” Syria’s reconstruction and recovery. “That’s important for us to hear and it’s important for us to think through what the effects are.”

“There’s a possibility and an opportunity here to reshape the Middle East in a way I could never have imagined,” Kim said.

Along with Kim and Blumenthal, Sens. Jim Risch (R-ID), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Chris Coons (D-DE), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Reps. Joe Wilson (R-SC) and Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ) met with al-Shaibani.

“We discussed steps that are essential for Syria to ensure their full access to the international economy. Syria has an opportunity to build a stable democracy, something the region desperately needs right now, and I am hopeful they are on the right track,” Risch, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said in a statement.

Shaheen, the Foreign Relations Committee’s ranking member, emphasized in a statement the need to move quickly to repeal the Caesar Act sanctions on Syria.

“Syria’s economy is in crisis, and its authorities need financial resources to maintain basic functions of governance,” she said. “If we are too slow to act, we risk plunging Syrians back into conflict, which is in no one’s interest except for Russia and Iran. We have a small window of opportunity to put Syria on a path toward stability and prosperity. Members of our recent bipartisan congressional delegation to Syria as well as senior Administration officials … all agree: now is the time for the Senate to act by repealing the Caesar Act sanctions.” 

Wicker chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Wilson said, “President Trump’s leadership has ushered in a historic opportunity for a new chapter, benefitting ALL. Congress must now act: fully repeal the Caesar Act.”

The Sept. 27 deadline to snap back United Nations sanctions on Iran’s nuclear and other weapons programs is rapidly approaching. 

The E3 — as France, Germany and the U.K. are known — announced last month that they planned to trigger the snapback sanctions mechanism, meaning the likely return of all U.N. sanctions that had been “sunsetted” per the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

In an interview with Jewish Insider’s Lahav Harkov on an episode of the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy’s Mideast Horizons podcast, Foundation for Defense of Democracies senior advisor Richard Goldberg explained the snapback procedure and how the sanctions are expected to damage Iran’s economy.

Goldberg recently finished a stint as the Trump administration’s National Energy Dominance Council’s senior counselor and was the director for countering Iranian weapons of mass destruction in the first Trump administration. 

“The Iran nuclear deal, in 2015, set out all kinds of parameters for the years to come,” Goldberg said. “In 2020, the conventional arms embargo on Iran went away. That was scheduled to happen as one of these sunsets under the deal. That was a [U.N.] Security Council restriction previously on Iran. … The missile embargo goes away.”

Another part of the Iran deal set to sunset was the snapback mechanism itself, which expires at the end of this month.

Snapback “was part of the marketing sell to Congress and the American people by [former Secretary of State] John Kerry and [former President] Barack Obama at the time, saying that if Iran violates the deal at any time, we can just bring back all the sanctions from the U.N.,” Goldberg recounted.

The snapback procedure outlined in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the formal name for the Iran deal, states that after snapback is invoked, other U.N. Security Council members have 10 days to propose a resolution opposing the return of the sanctions. The council would then have to affirmatively vote not to enact snapback, with the permanent members retaining veto power, Goldberg explained.

Ten days after the E3 triggered the snapback sanctions process, no country had submitted such a resolution, requiring the current president of the UNSC, South Korea, to do so instead, and hold a vote within the 30-day period from the snapback announcement. The vote has not been scheduled yet, and in all likelihood, the U.S., France or the U.K. will veto the resolution, such that snapback will take effect.

“The process does appear to be unfolding by the book,” Goldberg said.

“The onus is on the Iranians or the Russians or the Chinese to try to overcome a U.S. or European veto,” Goldberg said. “We have all the cards.”

If the resolution to cancel snapback does not pass, then the JCPOA “sort of self-destructs,” he said. That means the return of the U.N. missile embargo and conventional arms embargo on Tehran, and Iran will no longer be permitted to enrich any uranium.

“Then, it’s on the secretariat, the U.N. staff, the secretary-general … to actually do the things that need to happen to roll back to the previous sanctions regime,” Goldberg said. “And that will be the next test to see if the Russians or Chinese exert some kind of pressure. … I expect it will occur at this point.”

Goldberg said it is important not to stop the snapback process, even if Iran suddenly agrees to cooperate. 

“You don’t stop the snapback, which goes away in just a few weeks,” he said. “You cannot trigger this again after October; it’s done. Iran just wins all these strategic gains forever. … You have to complete the snapback because you don’t get another chance at it.”

The impact of snapback would be significant on several fronts.

“On a strategic level, they will no longer have any claim of legitimacy to transfer weapons to Russia,” Goldberg said. “Technically, the Russians today will tell you that it is fully legal under the Security Council, which is true. … That will be done after the snapback is completed.”

It also sends a message to any other countries who may want to help Iran rebuild its nuclear program or its missile activities that “you are in violation of a Security Council resolution and [the U.S. and Europe] are going to hold you accountable.”

In addition, Goldberg said the sanctions will hurt the regime economically.

“I think that’s one of the reasons why they fought this so hard,” he said. 

Throughout the years, as the E3 spoke out against Iran’s violations of the JCPOA, the deal was still in place, Goldberg said, and even as the Iranian economy tanked, the sunsetting of sanctions gave the markets hope that they had not yet reached bottom.

“You have seen the Rial go back into freefall since snapback was triggered. That means there’s instability again. There’s uncertainty again. Once snapback happens and all the international resolutions come back, there is no hope of the JCPOA coming back. …The patient is dead, we’re sitting shiva, it is over. I think that is an unpredictable reality for the regime, for its economy and its financial stability,” he said.

At the same time, the U.N. sanctions are not financial; they are on weapons programs and trade in components, but not on individuals or banks.

Goldberg argued that Iran “value[s] the veneer of legitimacy” from being part of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and what the sunsetting of U.N. sanctions permitted — such as selling drones that Russia used in its war against Ukraine.

“It’s a bizarre thing in regimes like Iran, even Russia, China, though they flout international law, conduct illicit activity, make a mockery of the international institutions which we founded and still care about,” he said, “they actually try to use them to create their own sense and source of legitimacy, so a Security Council resolution that has their back … is really valuable to them because it forces the Europeans to contort themselves.” 

“They yearn for that legitimacy to insulate themselves from further pressure from good actors,” he added.

Last week, Iran was elected vice-chair of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s annual conference, while refusing to allow the agency to inspect its nuclear sites.

“Only in the United Nations can such a thing occur,” Goldberg said, calling it “a wild, wild thing.” 

Iran is supposed to allow basic inspections of its nuclear facilities as a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Under the framework of the JCPOA, they agreed to adopt “additional protocols,” including snap inspections and videotaping of their nuclear facilities. Iran stopped respecting those commitments years ago.

Still, the IAEA was able to release quarterly reports on Iran’s enriched uranium stockpiles, something that Goldberg said is “not going to happen for the foreseeable future, because all those stockpiles and the materials and the facilities are either heavily degraded or destroyed” by the June strikes by Israel and the U.S.

The world, however, “should be worried long-term about reconstitution efforts,” he said. 

The question remains how the world will know if Iran tries to reconstitute its nuclear program, given the lack of oversight.

“We will have to rely on Western intelligence between Israel, the U.S., partners and allies, and whatever else the IAEA can glean on its own from visits and tours that the Iranians allow … We should obviously be pushing them to accept inspections, robust verification and dismantlement of anything that is left over. … The nuclear-capable missile program still has infrastructure and could be threatening … and maybe foreign actors come in to help them as well,” Goldberg said. 

France, Germany and the U.K. are poised to reinstate snapback sanctions on Iran in the next several days, after talks held in Geneva this week aimed at scaling back Iran’s nuclear program reportedly concluded with little progress.

The three countries — known as the E3 — sent a letter to the U.N. Security Council earlier this month outlining “ongoing concerns regarding the lack of assurances as to the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program” and Tehran’s ongoing violations of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, to which the E3 countries are still parties despite the U.S. withdrawal in 2018. 

The countries threatened to reinstate snapback sanctions by the end of August 2025 if “no satisfactory resolution” to the issue was reached before then. 

The mechanism to trigger snapback sanctions at the UNSC expires in October, at which point any attempt to adopt new UNSC sanctions could face vetoes from Russia and China. However, the E3 and U.S. are looking to start the process before Russia assumes the UNSC presidency in October, giving it the power to delay the imposition of snapback sanctions — a process that takes 30 days to complete — until its expiration date. 

The foreign ministers of the E3 and Iran met in Geneva earlier this week to discuss a diplomatic solution that would see Iran roll back its nuclear program without additional sanctions, which reportedly ended with little progress made.

A senior European diplomat told Axios on Wednesday that it would take a “diplomatic miracle” to prevent the reinstatement of snapback sanctions, with the European nations poised to trigger the mechanism as soon as Thursday.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio held a call with the E3 foreign ministers on Wednesday, during which all of the officials “reiterated their commitment to ensuring that Iran never develops or obtains a nuclear weapon,” State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Tommy Pigott said.

U.S. lawmakers have repeatedly pressed for the E3 to trigger the snapback mechanism.

The Treasury Department announced on Wednesday that it sanctioned an illicit Iranian shipping empire run by Mohammad Hossein Shamkhani, the son of a prominent Iranian government official. According to officials at the Treasury Department, the new sanctions — targeting more than 115 individuals, entities and shipping vessels — represent the largest Iran-related action since 2018.

“​​Our goal is to limit Tehran’s primary source of revenue, to pressure the regime to end its nuclear threat, curtail its ballistic missile program and stop its support for terrorist groups,” Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender told reporters on Wednesday. “The Trump administration seeks to drive down Iranian oil exports under President [Donald] Trump’s renewed max pressure campaign.”

Shamkhani is the son of Ali Shamkhani, a senior advisor to Iran’s supreme leader, who had supervised nuclear negotiations with the U.S. earlier this year. He controls a vast shipping network that stretches far beyond Iran, with ties to India, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Italy and Switzerland, among other nations based mostly in Europe and the Middle East, according to the Treasury Department. The network generates tens of billions of dollars in profit. 

Shamkhani and other Iranian oil traders often obscure their connections to Iran when overseas, and Treasury Department officials said the new sanctions will make it more difficult for them to conduct business abroad.

“What this action underscores is the extraordinary steps the Iranian regime is having to go through to execute oil sales,” a senior Treasury official said Wednesday. “Those that continue to go forward are going to be more complicated, making it harder for Iran to execute, and more importantly, likely resulting in them generating less revenue.”

Shamkhani’s network does not only transport Iranian oil. It also transports Russian oil, and last week he was sanctioned by the European Union for his role in the Russian oil trade.

“We fully are recognizing and going after this network because of the illicit activity that involves Russia and Iran,” the senior official said. A Bloomberg News investigation published last year detailed Shamkhani’s ties to both Moscow and Tehran. 

According to a Foundation for Defense of Democracies analysis, Iran exported 1.7 million barrels of oil per day in June, a higher figure than during the Biden administration. Iranian oil exports averaged 800,000 barrels per day at points in Trump’s first term, at the height of his maximum pressure sanctions campaign.

The House Financial Services Committee is set to consider legislation by Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) this week that aims to create oversight and set conditions for lifting sanctions on Syria, but stops short of full repeal of the 2019 Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act sanctions bill that other lawmakers are pushing on a bipartisan basis.

That the House is moving forward with Lawler’s legislation, which sets conditions for waiving Caesar Act sanctions, rather than the bipartisan Caesar Act repeal effort may indicate a level of continued skepticism from some House members about the prospect of full sanctions relief for the new Syrian government that has been pushed by the Trump administration.

“This bill modernizes the existing sanctions regime on Syria, requires assessments on existing sanctions relief provisions, and sets out goals for the Syrian government to meet anti-money laundering and anti-corruption standards,” Lawler said in a statement. “As the Trump Administration is already reviewing sanctions policy, we must ensure they have the tools to do so that reflect the current security environment.” 

“The al-Sharaa Administration certainly has a lot of work to do to reintegrate Syria with the U.S. and our allies. While this job should be difficult given the circumstances, it shouldn’t be impossible,” Lawler continued.

The Lawler bill would amend the Caesar Act to allow the president to waive the sanctions as long as the Syrian government meets a number of conditions, including that it not bomb its civilian population; allow humanitarian aid, medical access and freedom of travel; releases political prisoners detained by the Assad regime and allows international human rights groups to inspect prison facilities; does not target medical facilities, schools, residential areas, markets and community gatherings; combats production and proliferation of the illicit drug Captagon; and does not target or detain religious minorities.

The legislation also extends the waiver period for the sanctions from 180 days to two years. I would sunset the Caesar Act entirely when the administration verifies that Syria has been in compliance with those conditions for two years or at the end of 2029, whichever comes sooner.

Another section of the legislation instructs the administration to brief Congress on regulatory and enforcement relief provided to the Central Bank of Syria through the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, allowing the bank to re-integrate with the global financial system. 

It also asks the administration to assess whether the Export-Import Bank should be allowed to support exports to Syria; it is currently banned from doing so.

In addition, it instructs the administration to work to support policies to combat money laundering, weapons proliferation and corruption, as well as support financial connectivity and economic growth in Syria at the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.

A group of Senate Republicans sent a letter to French, German and U.K. officials this week urging them to immediately reimpose U.N. Security Council sanctions on Iran for the regime’s violations of the 2015 nuclear deal and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

Six GOP senators, led by Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, urged French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, German Federal Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul and U.K. Foreign Secretary David Lammy to utilize the snapback provision in UNSC Resolution 2231, which would reimpose all the sanctions lifted on Iran as part of the 2015 deal in response to any violations of the agreement. 

“Initiating the snapback process would be the right — and long overdue — move and would deny Iran the resources it uses for its terror agenda. The 2015 deal flooded Iran with cash while allowing it low-level enrichment, a clock to simply wait out, no limitations on ballistic missiles, and nothing to rein in terror proxies. Years down the line, the sanctions relief Iran received from this deal directly funded Iran’s terror proxies and led to Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel,” the senators wrote.

“Iran’s ejection of the International Atomic Energy Agency from its facilities marked the latest in a long chain of violations to Iran’s nuclear commitments. These actions confirm what we have known all along: the Iranian nuclear program is not civilian; it is the pursuit of a bomb to destroy Israel and threaten U.S. national security interests in the region. The international community must not tolerate this activity any longer,” they continued. 

The letter was co-signed by Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), John Cornyn (R-TX), Steve Daines (R-MT) and Bill Hagerty (R-TN).

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot warned on Tuesday that the E3, the European countries party to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, will trigger the snapback mechanism, reimposing all U.N. sanctions, if a new agreement is not reached.

The senators encouraged the recipients of their letter to go beyond simply initiating the snapback sanctions, which takes 30 days and would likely need to be completed before Russia takes over the presidency of the UNSC in October, the same time that the snapback mechanism is set to expire. 

“The decision to initiate the snapback process is only the beginning. The UNSC must fully process and formally re-instate UN sanctions without delay. This will take several weeks, and the October expiration of the snapback mechanism is looming. Furthermore, once sanctions are back in place, we must commit to their enforcement. Chinese purchases of Iranian oil and illicit oil smuggling through third countries have long violated existing U.S. secondary sanctions. Once UN sanctions return, all member countries will have a duty to crack down on this illegal activity,” the group wrote.

“President Trump has instituted a maximum pressure policy to bring Iran to the negotiating table. It is our sincere hope that our allies will stand side by side with America as we counter Iran’s threat to regional and global security for good,” they continued.

France, Germany and the U.K. will bring back sanctions on Iran via the U.N. Security Council if a nuclear deal is not reached by the end of August, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot warned on Tuesday.

Barrot said that the E3, the European countries party to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, will trigger the snapback mechanism, reimposing all U.N. sanctions, if a new agreement is not reached.

The Trump administration hopes to reach an agreement with the Islamic Republic to stop any uranium enrichment in Iran after Israeli and American strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites last month, aiming to prevent Tehran from rebuilding its severely damaged nuclear program.

“France and its partners are …  justified in reapplying global embargoes on arms, banks and nuclear equipment that were lifted 10 years ago,” Barrot said on the way to a meeting with EU foreign ministers in Brussels. “Without a firm, tangible and verifiable commitment from Iran, we will do so by the end of August at the latest.” 

The snapback mechanism expires in October and takes 30 days to activate, such that the end of August is the last chance to impose U.N. sanctions that cannot be vetoed by Russia and China, Iran’s allies on the Security Council. Moscow is slated to assume the presidency of the U.N. Security Council in October and could try to obstruct the move if it is not completed before then.

The E3 reached the shared policy in a phone call with Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday, according to Axios. 

Barrot’s statement also came after reports in Arabic and Iranian media that Germany planned to activate snapback sanctions this week, which the German Foreign Ministry denied to Jewish Insider. A German official confirmed that his country shares France’s position.

Earlier this week, Tehran threatened a “proportionate and appropriate response” if the E3 snaps back sanctions, a move Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei claimed “lacks any legal, political or moral justification.”

“European parties are constantly trying to use it as a tool in violation of their fundamental obligations,” he added. 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on Wednesday that the U.S. would sanction Francesca Albanese, the widely criticized United Nations special rapporteur for Israel and the Palestinian Territories.

“Today I am imposing sanctions on UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese for her illegitimate and shameful efforts to prompt [International Criminal Court] action against U.S. and Israeli officials, companies, and executives,” Rubio said in a statement. “Albanese’s campaign of political and economic warfare against the United States and Israel will no longer be tolerated. We will always stand by our partners in their right to self-defense.”

She is being sanctioned under the Trump administration’s executive order targeting the International Criminal Court. 

Members of Congress from both parties, as well as officials in both the Trump and Biden administrations, have condemned Albanese for her bias against Israel, downplaying and justifying the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks, comparing Israel to Nazi Germany, denying Israel’s right to defend itself and utilizing antisemitic rhetoric, among other issues, calling repeatedly calling for her to be dismissed. The French and German governments have also condemned the U.N. official.

A group of House members issued another call for her dismissal as recently as last month.

“The United States will continue to take whatever actions we deem necessary to respond to lawfare and protect our sovereignty and that of our allies,” Rubio continued.

The sanctions would bar Albanese from entering the U.S., where she has conducted speaking tours, and freeze any assets she, or any of her family members, have in the U.S.

“As chair of the DOJ Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, I applaud Secretary Rubio’s decision to impose sanctions on UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese,” Leo Terrell, a senior counsel at the Justice Department, told Jewish Insider. “In May, I wrote a public letter calling for her removal due to her long and troubling record of antisemitic rhetoric. This long-overdue step sends a clear message: such hatred will not be tolerated.“

Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, praised Rubio for the decision. 

“Her relentless and biased campaign against Israel and the United States has long crossed the line from human rights advocacy into political warfare,” Danon said. “Albanese has consistently debased the credibility of the UN by promoting false, dangerous narratives that are detached from reality.”

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), who has led multiple communiques from Congress calling for Albanese to be fired and recently said she has “blood on her hands,” told JI, “Today’s sanctions are …  an important step in response to Ms. Albanese’s regular antisemitism.”

“However,” Sherman continued, “until [the] UN removes Ms. Albanese from her post, it is clear that the UN continues to endorse antisemitism within its ranks.”

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East subcommittee, said, “Francesca Albanese’s absurd campaign against the U.S. and Israel ends today. We will not tolerate antisemitic witch hunts by the UN and its affiliates.”

Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) said, “Albanese is a full-throated supporter of Muslim terror.”

Terrell wrote to Albanese earlier this year condemning her for a series of letters she wrote to organizations and businesses that support and invest in Israel, suggesting they may be criminally liable for genocide and war crimes.

Albanese has also allegedly faced private criticism from U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

Hillel Neuer, the executive director of UN Watch, which has scrutinized Albanese’s activity and history, called Rubio’s decision “bold and courageous.” 

“No U.N. official has ever been sanctioned before in history,” Neuer told JI. “Then again, no U.N. official has ever been condemned for Holocaust distortion and antisemitism by France, Germany, Canada, and both Democratic and Republican US administrations. … She will never again spread her poison on American campuses or enter the country. Justice is served. Good triumphs over evil.”

Jewish Insider congressional correspondent Emily Jacobs contributed reporting.

President Donald Trump announced Friday afternoon that he was suspending the possibility of sanctions relief efforts with Iran after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei defiantly proclaimed victory over the U.S. and Israel in a videotaped message. 

“During the last few days, I was working on the possible removal of sanctions, and other things, which would have given a much better chance to Iran at a full, fast, and complete recovery – The sanctions are BITING! But no, instead I get [sic] hit with a statement of anger, hatred, and disgust, and immediately dropped all work on sanction relief, and more,” Trump said in the Truth Social post.

Previously, Trump had announced the potential for sanctions relief towards Iran during a press conference at the NATO Summit on Wednesday as part of a desire to help them recover from the war in exchange for other concessions. Later that day, Witkoff confirmed the administration had begun rolling back sanctions, although an administration official denied there was a change in policy.

In addition to ending any sanctions relief efforts, Trump said in a White House press conference that he would require Iran to allow entry for international inspectors to ensure the regime doesn’t rebuild its nuclear program.

The pivot comes as Israel Defense Minister Israel Katz announced that Israel will adopt the “Lebanon model” against Iran. The plan calls for continuing strikes against military targets to further degrade Iran’s military capabilities and cement the progress made during this month’s war. 

Two Senate Republicans are urging the administration against lifting any sanctions on Iran in absence of real concessions from the regime, following comments from Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff indicating the U.S. had already rolled back some sanctions.

Witkoff, speaking on CNBC on Wednesday, appeared to confirm that President Donald Trump had lifted some oil sanctions on Iran this week, as a signal of cooperation to China and Iran. Trump also said at the NATO summit that Iran would “need money to put that country back into shape. We want to see that happen,” adding, “If they’re going to sell oil, they’re going to sell oil.”

The comments came after Trump posted on Truth Social earlier this week, “China can continue to purchase Oil from Iran” — comments that a senior White House official said did not indicate any policy shift or sanctions relief.

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) told Jewish Insider he had heard Trump and Witkoff’s comments and that he was not sure what they were referring to, but said no sanctions should be removed until Iran ends its support for terrorism and guarantees that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors have access to facilities in Iran.

“We’re trying to get additional details, because we’re hearing the sanctions are still there, as well they should be. They still have acts of terrorism. Until we can actually verify that they’ve actually set aside planting terrorism around the region, we need to continue to be able to put pressure on them,” Lankford told JI.

He said the U.S. should not be removing any sanctions at this point, noting, “We can’t verify anything on the ground yet. … They’re literally trying to be able to block out the future [International Atomic Energy Agency] certification,” referring to an Iranian parliament effort to block IAEA inspectors from Iran going forward.

“We know they don’t have the power and the ability to be able to highly enrich uranium at this point, but we don’t have the ability, still, to be able to verify things on the ground,” Lankford continued. “And we have no shift in their policy, as far as we can tell — and certainly not in their charter — on what their stand is for terrorism in the region and to us.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said that sanctions relief should “[depend] on what we get for it. If we get complete denuclearization and a peace between Israel and Iran, that might be worth talking about.”

He said that the U.S. should not remove any sanctions preemptively.

“We should get something for it. Certainly, Iran is back on its heels now, and this is exactly the right time to negotiate some sort of long-standing arrangement,” Cornyn said. “I wouldn’t do anything preemptive.”

President Donald Trump announced Tuesday that he would allow China to continue to purchase oil from Iran, though a senior White House official denied there had been any change in policy or that sanctions would be lifted.

Trump’s comments appeared to many observers to be a reversal of his own administration’s actions just months ago and in contravention of congressionally approved sanctions designed to cut off the Iran-China oil trade, one of Iran’s most critical sources of funding.  

Trump’s comments drove concern among supporters of the sanctions and Iran analysts, who believe that loosening sanctions on Iran now will help it gather funding to rebuild its nuclear program.

“China can now continue to purchase Oil from Iran,” Trump posted on Truth Social on Tuesday morning, following the implementation of a ceasefire between Iran and Israel. “Hopefully they will be purchasing plenty from the U.S., also. It was my Great Honor to make this happen!”

Congress last year passed two separate bills with broad bipartisan support, the SHIP (Stop Harboring Iranian Petroleum) Act and the Iran China Energy Sanctions Act, which were specifically designed to choke off the oil trade between Iran and China. A third bill, the Enhanced Iran Sanctions Act, to place additional sanctions on the trade, has been advancing in the House with strong bipartisan support.

Trump’s announcement appears to mark a striking turnaround from his commitment to “maximum pressure” on Iran. Just months ago, the administration imposed sanctions on Chinese “teapot” refineries for importing Iranian oil for the first time, with the goal of pressuring Iran. 

“The President is committed to drive Iran’s illicit oil exports, including to China, to zero,” State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in April. “All sanctions will be fully enforced under the Trump Administration’s maximum pressure campaign on Iran.”

A senior White House official told JI on Tuesday that “The President was simply calling attention to the fact that, because of his decisive actions to obliterate Iran’s nuclear facilities and broker a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, the Strait of Hormuz will not be impacted, which would have been devastating for China.”

The official continued, “The President continues to call on China and all countries to import our state-of-the-art oil rather than import Iranian oil in violation of U.S. sanctions.”

“China is the main consumer of Iranian oil. Enabling China to continue purchasing Iranian oil violates existing sanctions and will allow Iran to rebuild its capabilities, including its nuclear program,” Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), the lead Democratic sponsor of the Iran China Energy Sanctions Act, told Jewish Insider. 

“With the regime now significantly weakened, we must continue applying maximum pressure and cut off its sources of funding. Doing so will help protect America, our military and diplomatic assets, and our allies around the world.”

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), the lead sponsor of both bills, did not respond to a request for comment.

Trump’s announcement is also driving concern from Iran analysts.

“China purchasing oil from Iran allows it to rearm, refinance and rebuild making future conflict with Israel more likely. It also gives Tehran resources to rebuild its nuclear program,” Jason Brodsky, the policy director for United Against Nuclear Iran, warned. “Also if your goal is zero enrichment in Iran, allowing China to flood Iran with resources makes that goal harder to achieve.”

Brodsky added: “The calculus behind getting China to curtail its purchases of Iranian oil is to achieve zero enrichment in Iran, which has been the president’s longstanding and rightful position.”

“If ever there was a time for more maximum pressure, it would be in a post-strike scenario to contain or roll back the Islamic Republic and prevent China and Russia from helping it ‘build back better,’” Behnam Ben Taleblu, the senior director of the Iran program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said. 

Ben Taleblu also noted the sanctions “[undermine] the spirit and letter” of the administration’s executive order and national security memorandum on oil sanctions, while FDD’s CEO Mark Dubowitz highlighted that the trade “violate[s] U.S. sanctions — passed by Congress on a bipartisan basis.”

AIPAC, which urged lawmakers to support the SHIP Act, said in a statement, “We must continue to apply maximum pressure on Iran to ensure that it cannot rebuild its nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities.”

This story was updated at 5:50 p.m. on Tuesday to include comments from a White House spokesperson.

Bipartisan groups of House and Senate members have introduced legislation to repeal the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, sanctions legislation passed in 2019 targeting the former Syrian government led by Bashar al-Assad, a step that proponents say will help remove obstacles to reconstruction and stabilization efforts in post-Assad Syria.

The administration recently announced that it would be lifting all sanctions on Syria, but the Caesar Act sanctions can only be temporarily waived, for periods of 180 days, barring a full repeal by Congress. Administration officials have indicated that they’d support such a step, and sanctions relief, in principle, has broad support on both sides of the aisle.

The sanctions, named for a pseudonymous individual who documented the Assad regime’s torture of civilians, also targeted Syrian critical industries, individuals and businesses that supported or did business with the Syrian government and Iranian and Russian entities that supported the Syrian government. 

Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced legislation on Wednesday to repeal the sanctions. 

Reps. Joe Wilson (R-SC), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), Lou Correa (D-CA), Jack Bergman (R-MI), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) and Mike Levin (D-CA) introduced a similar bill in the House last week.

“We can keep the new Syrian authorities accountable without decimating the economy,” Shaheen said in a statement. “Sustained diplomatic engagement can yield tremendous results.”

Paul argued against the Caesar Act sanctions in principle, saying they had been too broadly targeted.

“While the Caesar Act was intended to isolate the Assad regime, it has ended up punishing everyday Syrians — fueling poverty, crippling recovery, and blocking progress toward peace,” Paul said. “This repeal is about restoring a more targeted, principled approach that holds bad actors accountable without inflicting unnecessary suffering on the very people we claim to support.”

The timeline for the repeal effort is somewhat unclear: Secretary of State Marco Rubio testified in May that the administration’s ultimate goal would be to repeal the act, conditioned on the new Syrian government “mak[ing] enough progress” on U.S. priority issues. 

But U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack, who also serves as U.S. envoy to Syria, indicated greater urgency, calling for Congress to repeal the sanctions within the first 180-day waiver period, which is renewable if the sanctions are not repealed before then.

“I promise you the one person who has less patience with these sanctions than all of you is President Trump,” Barrack said during a visit to Syria to meet with President Ahmad al-Sharaa last month.

The House lawmakers leading the repeal legislation represent a broad spectrum of the House,  ranging from a former chair of the House Progressive Caucus to a former House Freedom Caucus member, and including Israel hawks on both sides of the aisle.

“The Assad regime sanctioned by the Caesar Act no longer exists, and it is time to repeal the law to provide long-term certainty to those who would like to invest in the reconstruction and rebuilding of Syria,” Wilson said in a statement.

Panetta said that repealing the sanctions would help the U.S. “position itself as a partner for continued progress” as adversaries aim to gain a foothold in Syria.

“The repeal of these broad sanctions will give foreign partners the certainty they need to invest in the Syrian economy and give their new government a chance to succeed,” Jayapal said.

The Treasury Department imposed sanctions on Tuesday on several individuals and charities that the U.S. alleges are connected to the terrorist groups Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. 

“Today’s action underscores the importance of safeguarding the charitable sector from abuse by terrorists like Hamas and the PFLP, who continue to leverage sham charities as fronts for funding their terrorist and military operations,” Michael Faulkender, the department’s deputy secretary, said in a statement.  

“Treasury will continue to use all available tools to prevent Hamas, the PFLP, and other terrorist actors from exploiting the humanitarian situation in Gaza to fund their violent activities at the expense of their own people.”

The sanctions will target “five individuals and five sham charities located abroad that are prominent financial supporters of Hamas’s Military Wing and its terrorist activities,” the Treasury Department said, as well as a separate fraudulent charity linked to the PFLP.

Both terror groups have a long history of abusing the charitable sector under the pretense of humanitarian work. The sanctions come as Hamas continues to hold 55 hostages in Gaza — including the bodies of two Americans.

The sanctions will have implications, including civil and criminal penalties, for any individual or entity that does business with the designated groups, according to the department. 

The announcement builds on recent Treasury Department efforts to target terror funding networks, including its designation in October of the anti-Israel group Samidoun as a “sham charity” operating as a key international fundraiser for PFLP. 

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) argued on Wednesday that sanctions on Iran’s nuclear program can’t be separated from other sanctions on the regime as part of a nuclear deal, comparing the approach apparently being taken by the Trump administration to that of the Obama administration.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said in congressional testimony this week that talks with Tehran have revolved solely around Iran’s nuclear program and have not addressed its sponsorship of terrorism or its ballistic missile program, but said that sanctions related to terrorism and missiles would remain in place if those issues are not addressed in a potential deal.

“The Obama administration invented the category of ‘nuclear sanctions’ as an excuse to give the Ayatollah whatever he wanted for a nuclear deal,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said to Jewish Insider. 

“It has nothing to do with how Congress passed or past presidents implemented sanctions against the Iranian regime, which was to use our most powerful sanctions against the full range of Iran’s aggression. President Trump rightly refused to certify and then withdrew from the deal because he said that lifting these ‘nuclear sanctions’ gave Iran too much for too little benefit,” he continued.

Congressional Republicans argued in the past, when the original nuclear deal included a similar formula, that the distinctions between nuclear and non-nuclear sanctions were largely specious. Those same lawmakers have maintained that any new funding the regime received would ultimately fuel proxy terrorism and regional destabilization, regardless of the targets of those sanctions.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) expressed confidence that the Trump administration understood that any deal must be multi-faceted, though he noted that Congressional Republicans haven’t been briefed on the talks.

“I have to believe at the end of the day, they realize that it’s not just about enrichment, but it’s all the other enabling capabilities, because the reality is the world’s a dangerous place and if they had that underlying capability, maybe then they’ll build their own bomb,” Tillis told JI.

“We got to support Israel. Iran uses proxies to attack America and Israel, they chant ‘Death to America.’ So what they’ve got to do is they’ve got to stop enriching uranium, that’s number one. And number two, we’ve got to make sure they have no money to give their proxies,” Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) said when asked his position on a deal.

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) told JI he hadn’t kept up with Rubio’s testimony, but said that addressing Iran’s proxy terrorism is crucial.

“Iran’s the largest state sponsor of terrorism. Israel is fighting proxies all the way around them. The entire region’s destabilized. Egypt is struggling economically because of the Houthis and what they’re doing,” Lankford said. “The proxies are the problem in the area and you can’t disconnect Iran and the regime and what they’re doing in the entire region to destabilize the region.”

Another Senate Republican, speaking on condition of anonymity to speak candidly, said he has faith in Rubio, but that an arrangement as outlined by Rubio would require “an awful lot of trust built into it, and I don’t trust Iran.”

“Money is obviously fungible. And the whole point of proxies is you can do whatever you want without doing whatever you want [directly],” the senator said. “There’s just an awful lot of trust built into.”

The senator said, “There’s probably a time where I’d be willing to give them a little bit of room, but they’re an awfully long ways down the road, so I don’t know. I just hope they keep a very, very tight grip on a very, very short leash.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told JI that, “I like the American position, the administration’s position of no enrichment, complete dismantlement … and [would] have to include their missile program.”

“Anything short of that would be inadequate,” he added.

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) similarly argued that a deal around Iran’s nuclear weapons would likely include addressing Iran’s pursuit of intercontinental ballistic missiles. He added that Iran should not receive any sanctions relief without addressing its nuclear buildup.

Other senators seem to be focusing their attention more on ensuring that dismantling Iran’s enrichment remains a red line for the United States.

“At the end of the day, we’ve got to see what the final package is,” Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE), who recently led nearly all Senate Republicans on a letter insisting on full dismantlement, said. “The biggest issue is going to be the enrichment part. If we can crack the enrichment nut, that’s a big deal.”

Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) similarly said, “The president’s been very clear. I think the Republican side of the aisle in the Senate has been very clear. No enrichment, zero, zilch, nada, no centrifuges. The Iranian leadership doesn’t need it. They can import uranium for civil nuclear energy, so they can either take it or leave it. We can do it the easy way, the hard way.”

Striking a defiant tone on Wednesday amid intensifying international pressure to end the war in Gaza, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu laid down his conditions for the end of hostilities.

“The world is telling us to end the war,” Netanyahu said, in the first press conference he has held in Israel since December. “I am prepared to end the war according to clear conditions: Hamas lays down its weapons, steps down from power, returns all the hostages, Gaza is demilitarized and we implement the Trump plan” to relocate residents of Gaza. 

“Whoever is calling for us to end the war is calling for Hamas to stay in power,” Netanyahu said, a day after Britain suspended free trade talks with Israel and the EU said it will review whether Israel is violating the human rights clause of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and two days after France, the U.K. and Canada threatened sanctions against Israel.

Netanyahu stressed that if there was an option for a temporary ceasefire in exchange for the release of hostages, Israel would accept that. He said there are 20 hostages confirmed to be alive in Gaza and the remains of up to 38 deceased individuals.

The prime minister reiterated previous comments he has made that friends of Israel, including U.S. senators, have said they support Israel in its war against Hamas, but they cannot accept a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, which many have said worsened after Israel instituted an 11-week blockade of aid.

Addressing reports of strained ties between the U.S. and Israel, Netanyahu said that he spoke to President Donald Trump about 10 days ago and Trump told him, “Bibi, I want you to know I have a total commitment to you and to the State of Israel.”

Netanyahu said that both countries seek “together to ensure Iran doesn’t get nuclear weapons, that Hamas will be thrown out of Gaza, that Trump’s plan — which I think is a genius plan — will happen,” and “change the face of the Middle East.” He stressed that the relocation plan would only be for those who wish to leave Gaza.

Referring to Trump’s recent Middle East tour, which excluded Israel, Netanyahu said, “I have no opposition to the U.S. deepening its ties to the Arab world … I think this can help broaden the Abraham Accords that I’m very interested in.”

Turning to Iran, Netanyahu said, “Iran remains a serious threat to Israel. We are in full coordination with the U.S. — we talk to them all the time. We hope that it’s possible to reach an agreement that will prevent a nuclear weapon from Iran and will prevent Iran from having the ability to enrich uranium. If it is reached, of course, we will welcome it,” he said, before adding, “In any case, Israel reserves the right to defend itself against a regime that threatens to destroy us.”

Netanyahu previously called for total dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, which would go farther than stopping Iran from enriching uranium. However, an official in Netanyahu’s office denied that his remark reflects a change in policy.

Speaking on the IDF’s expanded engagement in Gaza, Netanyahu laid out three phases of “Operation Gideon’s Chariots,” as the latest stage in the war is called: the immediate entry of aid into Gaza; opening aid distribution points that will be managed by American companies and secured by the IDF; and the creation of a “sterile” humanitarian zone for civilians.’

Netanyahu said that at the end of the operation, “all of Gaza’s territories will be under Israeli security control, and Hamas will be totally defeated.”

Netanyahu slammed Britain’s decision to sanction veteran settler leader Daniella Weiss, calling it “shameful” that “instead of sanctioning Hamas, they sanction a woman who is threatened every day … they are under pressure from the Islamist minority, from a population that is repeating the Hamas propaganda, the false propaganda and they give in to it. We don’t. We responded aggressively to them calling to give the ultimate reward for Oct. 7 — to give a Palestinian state. There is no greater prize for terror.” 

The United Kingdom, France and Canada threatened on Monday to take “concrete actions” and impose sanctions against Israel if it does not change its policies on humanitarian aid and the war in Gaza, as well as settlements in the West Bank.

The statement from the three countries came in response to Israel’s announcement that it had begun an escalation in the fighting in Gaza, while allowing in a limited amount of food, 11 weeks after blocking all aid in an attempt to pressure Hamas to free more hostages.

The countries said they “strongly oppose the expansion of Israel’s military operations in Gaza. The level of human suffering is intolerable. Israel’s denial of essential humanitarian assistance to the civilian population is unacceptable and risks breaching International Humanitarian Law.”

In addition, they said that the “basic quantity of food” to be allowed into Gaza “is wholly inadequate,” and that Israel must work with United Nations agencies. Israel and the U.S. have been working on an alternative mechanism to distribute aid rather than rely on U.N. agencies, which have not prevented Hamas from pocketing large quantities of aid and in some cases employed Hamas terrorists.

“If Israel does not cease the renewed military offensive and lift its restrictions on humanitarian aid, we will take further concrete actions in response,” the statement reads.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said in an interview with French radio station France Inter on Tuesday that “further concrete actions” could include supporting a push led by the Netherlands to cancel the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which would in effect downgrade relations between Jerusalem and Brussels. Canada and the U.K. would not be involved, as they are not EU member states.

France, the U.K. and Canada also spoke out against Israeli settlements in the West Bank, calling them illegal and saying they “will not hesitate to take further action, including sanctions.”  

In addition, they called to work towards a two-state solution, arguing that it is “the only way to bring long-lasting peace and security that both Israelis and Palestinians deserve.” 

The three countries said they “have always supported Israel’s right to defend Israelis against terrorism” and called on Hamas to release the 58 hostages held since Oct. 7, 2023, at least 20 of whom are thought to be alive.

A second statement from 23 countries, including most of the EU, plus Australia, Canada, the U.K., New Zealand, Norway and Japan, also called on Israel to “allow a full resumption of aid into Gaza immediately” and enable U.N. agencies to distribute it, and called for a two-state solution. The EU countries that did not sign the letter were Austria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Malta, Romania and Slovakia.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded that “the leaders in London, Ottawa and Paris are offering a huge prize for the genocidal attack on Israel on October 7 while inviting more such atrocities.”

“Israel accepts President [Donald] Trump’s vision and urges all European leaders to do the same,” he added. ”The war can end tomorrow if the remaining hostages are released, Hamas lays down its arms, its murderous leaders are exiled and Gaza is demilitarized. No nation can be expected to accept anything less and Israel certainly won’t. This is a war of civilization over barbarism. Israel will continue to defend itself by just means until total victory is achieved.”

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar shared on X a screenshot of a press release in which Hamas welcomed the countries’ threat, and added: “What a disgrace.”

French President Emmanuel Macron has been increasingly critical of Israel in recent weeks, calling Israel’s Gaza policies “shameful” and saying the EU should consider revoking its free trade agreement with Israel, to which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded that Macron is standing with Hamas. France is also spearheading, together with Saudi Arabia, a high-level meeting at the U.N. next month calling for a two-state solution.

Marine Le Pen, president of the far-fight French party National Rally, told i24 News on Monday that she is “very concerned about the distance that Emmanuel Macron is creating with Israel, if I may put it this way, precisely at the worst possible time. At a time when Israel is fighting a war against terrorism, when it needs the support of its friends, and France has traditionally been a friendly country toward Israel.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a close ally of President Donald Trump, called for a cautious and deliberate approach to removing sanctions on Syria and emphasized that Congress has a significant oversight role to play, hours after Trump announced he plans to lift “all” U.S. sanctions on Syria.

Graham’s statement on sanctions relief came as he touched down in Turkey for a trip aimed at evaluating the situation in Syria and appeared aimed at pumping the brakes on Trump’s sweeping declaration. Reactions from others on Capitol Hill to the news have been decidedly mixed across both parties.

Graham said that he’s “very inclined to support sanctions relief for Syria under the right conditions,” but also cautioned that the Syrian government took power through force.

“Waiving congressionally passed sanctions is a complicated process. While I would like to empower the new players in Syria, it has to be done in a coordinated fashion with our allies — especially our friends in Israel — so that numerous security concerns can be addressed,” Graham said in the statement.

“This newly formed government in Syria may be a good investment and could be the pathway to unifying Syria, making it a stable part of the region. However, there is a lot that must be learned before making that determination,” he continued. “A stable Syria would be a game changer for the region, but given its past, their progress must be evaluated closely.”

Graham highlighted that Congress has a role to play in any sanctions relief and noted that the administration must submit a report to Congress outlining substantive changes to the situation on the ground in Syria before its designation as a state sponsor of terrorism can be lifted.

“That report has not been received and Congress has the opportunity to review this action if it chooses,” Graham continued. “The designation of Syria as a state sponsor of terrorism has tremendous ramifications apart from the sanctions. I am certain that Congress would need to be informed of changes in conditions placed on Syria and how they have met those conditions before Congress can make an informed decision on whether or not it should approve the change in designation.”

Graham also noted that Israeli officials are “extremely concerned about the state of play in Syria,” and said that he plans to discuss those concerns and keep in close touch with Israeli officials during the trip, “so that we can fully understand the implications of sanctions waivers.”

He noted that attacks on Israel have been launched from Syria in the past. Israel has deployed troops to a buffer zone over the Syrian border and conducted strikes on military infrastructure in the country since the fall of the Assad regime.

Reactions from others on Capitol Hill have been mixed, across both parties.

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, who had pushed for phased, conditional sanctions relief for Syria, said he deferred to Trump’s decision on the issue without strongly endorsing it. He said he’d discussed the subject with Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio prior to Trump’s conversation with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman.

“It sounded as if they had some negotiations on it. He is the president of the United States and I respect his judgement,” Risch said.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who had joined with Risch in calling for conditional sanctions relief, praised Trump’s decision.

“I commend President Trump’s decision to lift all sanctions on Syria,” Shaheen said. “These sanctions succeeded in their original goal of aiding in the downfall of the brutal Assad regime. I welcome their removal now to give the new Syria a chance to develop into a free and prosperous state independent of the malign influence of Russia, Iran and China.”

She said the U.S. should “move expeditiously” to lift sanctions and “increase our engagement with the Syrian authorities” alongside allies and partners. 

“Stability and security in the heart of the Middle East will pay dividends for U.S. interests and along Syria’s borders, including for our friends in Israel, Lebanon, Türkiye, Iraq and Jordan,” Shaheen continued. “We must do all we can to ensure Syria continues to move in the direction of democracy, stability and security.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) fell closer to Graham’s view of the situation, emphasizing that Trump “has to come to Congress” and that sanctions relief should be conditional to achieve concessions from the Syrian government.

“He has no explanation for why he’s just unilaterally surrendering all of this leverage,” Blumenthal said. “For the guy who talks about the art of the deal, he’s gotten nothing for it in the way of any sort of guarantees about what the Syrian government’s going to do.”

He said that whether Congress would repeal the sanctions would depend on what the Syrian government commits to do.

“This regime is basically an unknown — a vast unknown — headed by someone who was regarded as a terrorist until just months ago,” Blumenthal said. “I want some more security guarantees and also other conditions.”

President Donald Trump is reportedly considering easing sanctions on Iran to pave the way for a public meeting with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in New York at the United Nations General Assembly later this month. 

Wendy Sherman, who served as lead negotiator for the Obama administration on the JCPOA, told Jewish Insider on Wednesday that she “would be shocked if Iran agreed to a meeting without some sanctions relief.” According to Sherman, if Trump is serious in offering Tehran some relief, “There are plenty of ways to do this so that everyone’s interests can be met and so that everyone’s face can be saved.”

Bloomberg reported that during an Oval Office meeting on Monday, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin expressed his support for such a move, while then-National Security Advisor John Bolton “forcefully” opposed such a step. On Tuesday, Trump fired Bolton, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo suggested a meeting with Rouhani is a possibility. The Daily Beast reported on Wednesday that Trump has indicated he is “actively considering” the French plan to grant the Iranian regime a $15 billion credit line if they return to compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal.

Sherman told JI that even if the U.S. relaunches direct negotiations with Iran, it “is a very complicated undertaking. I think what’s most important here is that the president go to a meeting with a strategy; a clear objective and a plan.”

Following that, the former diplomat said, “he will need a team that can follow up, a set of consultations that have happened with our partners and allies, and a really full idea of not only what the first step is, but what the next many steps are. The president, as we know, has gone into some of these meetings thinking that he could simply trust his own instincts and his own impulses and that has never gotten a result good for our national security.”

Sherman claimed that “virtually all” of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates have said they would return to the 2015 nuclear deal “and I agree with that. Of course, Iran would have to come into full compliance. Likely, we would then, as in all arms control agreements, work for a follow-on agreement.”

Sherman said the conditions of the deal “have changed because of the president’s actions and Iran’s reaction to the president’s actions. The JCPOA remains the essential base but, as a negotiator, you have to take that into account and you have to address where we are.”

Tommy Vietor, Obama’s former National Security Council spokesman, said he believes “Trump should be willing to meet with Rouhani or any other foreign leader. The problem is that Trump is a terrible negotiator. He’s trying to buy a meeting with Rouhani by offering sanctions relief in the hope that it will lead to a negotiation and eventually a deal as strong as the JCPOA. Meanwhile, hard liners in Iran are empowered and our European allies are furious at us for ratcheting up tensions.”

Jason Brodsky, policy director of United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), told JI that easing sanctions just to meet the Iranian president, “who isn’t its supreme decision-maker, isn’t maximum pressure.” Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said that Trump appears poised to make “the same mistake President Obama made in 2013 when he relieved the sanctions pressure on Iran to incentivize negotiations that led to the fatally-flawed JCPOA, giving Tehran patient pathways to nuclear weapons. Why President Trump would want to pull an Obama 2.0 is troubling and puzzling.” 

Douglas Feith, a former under secretary of Defense for President George W. Bush, said that Trump “deserves credit for the surprising effectiveness of unilateral U.S. sanctions. If Iran wants sanctions relief, it should be willing to alter its behavior substantially. If it does so, some sanctions relief can reasonably be granted.” But, Feith added, “The U.S. should not have to pay Iran anything to come to the table.”