In a week that saw French right-wing leader Marine Le Pen banned from running for office, the South Korean Constitutional Court’s ouster of President Yoon Suk Yeol from office on Friday has critics looking towards Beijing’s hand in efforts to remove the leader from power.

‘Yoon’s foreign and security policies stand in stark contrast to the pro-China figures long supported and controlled by the [Chinese Communist Party (CCP)],’ Anna Mahjar-Barducci, Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) project director, told Fox News Digital. She explained that those policies ‘posed a threat to Beijing’s long-term strategy of cultivating a pro-China faction in South Korea,’

Mahjar-Barducci claimed the CCP has used ‘overt economic cooperation, political donations, covert benefit transfers and even illegal sexual bribery’ to cultivate ‘certain South Korean political figures over time, aiming to undermine the U.S.-South Korea alliance, weaken South Korea’s strategic independence and expand its regional influence at the expense of the U.S.’ 

Mahjar-Barducci also claimed that one Korean activist who spoke to her on Friday told her that election fraud in South Korea had been organized in cooperation with China, whose government had unduly influenced the past two general elections. 

The Associated Press reported on Friday that supporters of the ousted president were enraged by the decision. Kim Min-seon, a Yoon supporter, is quoted as saying it was the only way to deal with liberals blocking Yoon’s efforts to fight Pyongyang and Beijing’s campaigns to threaten South Korea’s democracy through cyberattacks, disinformation and technology theft — something denied by the opposition party. 

Yoon had long provoked the ire of North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un over his plans to increase his country’s nuclear capacity. The former South Korean leader sought increased cooperation with the U.S. as a deterrent to the North Korean threat.

A spokesman from the Chinese embassy in Washington D.C. did not answer Fox News Digital questions on allegations the country interferes in Seoul’s politics. Questions sent to the South Korean embassy were not returned. 

Mahjar-Barducci also explained that given the ‘intensive coverage by Beijing’s media’ of Yoon’s dismissal, the CCP is ‘brimming with pride’ and ‘extremely pleased’ with the turn of events. Beijing ‘has already taken down two pro-American South Korean presidents, Park Geun-hye and Yoon Suk Yeol, which shows just how deep Beijing’s infiltration and influence in South Korea are,’ she said.

‘South Korea needs to be the strongest ally, along with Japan, of America,’ Mahjar-Barducci continued. But Beijing is poising itself to ‘win over this important strategic area,’ which the U.S. ‘cannot afford to lose.’

Mahjar-Barducci said Yoon’s removal is part of a ‘pattern… all over the world’ of right-wing candidates being forbidden from seeking election, including Romanian right-wing presidential frontrunner Călin Georgescu and French right-wing politician Le Pen. ‘The judiciary has been weaponized once again,’ she explained.

The CCP’s hand in South Korea comes at a time when Beijing is holding large-scale military drills around Taiwan, with 19 vessels from the Chinese navy being spotted in the waters surrounding Taiwan between Monday and Tuesday morning. Mahjar-Barducci said that while Beijing has attempted to make such drills ‘a new normal,’ it has also warned that the ‘drills could unexpectedly turn into a real war.’

South Korea will hold elections for a new president in two months. Fox News Digital has reported that surveys show liberal opposition Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung is ‘an early favorite’ for the position.

The Senate approved changes to the House’s budget resolution on Saturday after an hourslong series of amendment votes during which Democrats sought to put Republicans on record on issues like tariffs and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 

It passed mostly along party lines in a 51 to 48 vote.

The amended framework would raise the debt ceiling by up to $5 trillion within the reconciliation process, taking future leverage away from Senate Democrats. It would also make President Trump’s 2017 tax cuts permanent by using what’s called a current policy baseline that Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., decides.

The scoring tool essentially means the cost of making Trump’s tax cuts permanent would be factored at $0 because it extends current policy, rather than counting it as new dollars being added to the federal deficit.

Budget reconciliation lowers the vote threshold in the Senate from 60 to 51, which lets Republicans approve certain priorities with no Democrat support. 

Washington’s Republican trifecta thus sees reconciliation as a key tool for delivering on Trump agenda items. 

The Senate’s Friday night ‘vote-a-rama’ was triggered by the chamber agreeing to a motion to proceed to the budget resolution amendment on Thursday night. Nearly a day of debate followed before the vote series was initiated.

During this type of voting series, senators of both parties can introduce an unlimited number of amendments, and many get floor votes.

The budget would address border funding for the Trump administration as well as extend the hallmark tax cuts Trump passed in 2017. 

Initially, there was stark disagreement between Republicans in the House and Senate on how to organize a budget reconciliation resolution. The House GOP leaders preferred one bill with both the border and taxes included, while those in the Senate wanted to have two separate resolutions for them. 

But the House’s approach ultimately won out, with Trump supporting their plan. 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is slated to meet with Panama leaders next week amid President Donald Trump’s continued efforts to regain control of the key strategic and military resource. 

The Trump administration has been outspoken about national security threats presented by alleged Chinese interference.

During a February visit to the country, Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote in an X post that ‘the United States cannot, and will not, allow the Chinese Communist Party to continue with its effective and growing control over the Panama Canal area.’ 

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell confirmed on Friday the secretary of defense will attend the 2025 Central American Security Conference, participating in discussions that will ‘drive ongoing efforts to strengthen the U.S.’s partnerships with Panama and other Central American nations,’ according to a report from the Associated Press.

The president, who has criticized the six-figure premiums imposed on U.S. ships traveling along the vital waterway, previously suggested repurchasing the canal.

It was built by the U.S. over the span of multiple decades, but was eventually handed over to Panama during the Carter administration.

The ‘Panama Canal Repurchase Act,’ a bill that was recently introduced in Congress, would give Trump the authority to negotiate with appropriate Panamanian government officials to reacquire the Panama Canal.

Panama President José Raúl Mulino previously said China does not have influence over the canal and accused Trump of ‘lying’ about potentially acquiring it, according to the AP.

BlackRock, Inc. later announced a $23 billion deal with Hong Kong-based CK Hutchinson to take ownership of the Panamanian ports of Cristobal and Balboa, along with 43 ports in 23 other countries, Fox News Digital previously reported.

The canal could be used as leverage for China in U.S. tariff negotiations.

Hegseth will also visit Eglin Air Force Base in Florida to meet with military members and leadership at the 7th Special Forces Group, according to the AP.

Fox News’ Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.

The Senate kicked off a marathon vote series on Friday night, which Republicans need to get through in order to approve their changes to the House’s plan for President Donald Trump’s budget. 

The endless amendment votes began after nearly a day of debate concluded. Republicans passed a key motion on Thursday to begin the process, which will end with a vote on their adjustments to the House GOP’s budget. 

During the ‘vote-a-rama,’ senators of both parties are able to introduce an unlimited number of amendments, and many are expected to get floor votes. Democrats are planning to use the marathon of votes as an opportunity to force Republicans to go on record on Trump’s tariffs and the actions of the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 

On Thursday, the Senate agreed on a motion to proceed by a vote of 52 to 48, along party lines. 

The only exception was Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who voted against it. He has notably criticized the budget amendment’s provision on the debt ceiling, which would raise it by up to $5 trillion. 

During the last such series in February, the Senate voted for about 10 hours, into the early morning. The budget they passed was the Senate GOP’s preferred strategy of having two budget reconciliation resolutions for the border and extending Trump’s tax cuts. 

But the House’s plan to address both in one bill ultimately won out after getting Trump’s blessing. 

It’s unclear how long the voting will last, as it depends on how many amendments get votes and when Democrat and Republican leadership in the Senate come to a time agreement. 

When the voting series ends, a final vote will take place to approve the Senate amendment to the House’s budget. If this passes, it will still need to return to the lower chamber before taking effect. 

In addition to raising the debt ceiling, and in doing so taking leverage away from the Senate Democrats, the Senate budget amendment makes Trump’s tax cuts permanent by what’s known as a current policy baseline, determined by Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Former President Barack Obama sought to distance himself from the Democratic Party after leaving it in shambles following his departure from the White House, according to a new book. 

The book, ‘Fight: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House,’published by William Morrow and Company, claims that Obama was never a Democratic Party loyalist. Instead, the authors allege, Obama curried favor from a group of ‘Black professionals’ for his campaigns, unlike former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and former President Joe Biden. 

Additionally, Obama’s creation of Organizing for Action — a nonprofit that launched in 2012 following Obama’s re-election to advance his legislative priorities — fractured the Democratic Party, according to the book, authored by political journalists Jonathan Allen ofNBC News and Amie Parnes of The Hill.  

‘Though Organizing for Action never realized his vision, it competed with the party for power and money,’ the book said. ‘He left the Democratic Party far weaker than he found it. Or, as one Black party operative put it, ‘Obama destroyed that s—.’’ 

The book also detailed how the Clintons, along with Biden and former Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile and a few other party operatives, sought to ‘rebuild the party infrastructure’ following Obama’s 2016 departure from the White House. This meant preventing far-left Democrats from seizing control of the party and ensuring party loyalists ran the show, according to the book. 

‘By helping install party loyalists at the national and state committees over the course of years, these establishment Democrats kept progressive outsiders at bay. ‘You know who did that?’ said one Black Biden ally familiar with the maneuvering. ‘Bill and Hillary motherf—ing Clinton,’’ the book related. 

‘Fight,’ released Tuesday, also revealed how Obama remained hesitant to back former Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election to replace Biden, amid concerns about his mental fitness. The book claimed that Obama didn’t believe Harris had the capacity to beat now-President Donald Trump in the November 2024 race, frustrating Harris. 

Ultimately, Obama endorsed Harris five days after Biden announced he would not run for office again in the 2024 race — a delay that offended Harris and required some ‘mending’ between the two Democrats, a source close to Obama said, Allen and Parnes wrote. 

A spokesperson for Obama’s press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Even so, Obama’s wife, former first lady Michelle Obama, appeared at the Democratic National Convention in August 2024 after Harris clinched the party’s nomination. 

‘Kamala Harris is more than ready for this moment,’ Michelle Obama said at the convention. ‘She is one of the most qualified people ever to seek the office of the presidency and she is one of the most dignified — a tribute to her mother, to my mother, and probably to your mother, too, the embodiment of the stories we tell ourselves about this country.’ 

Meanwhile, Democrat strategists predict that Barack Obama’s influence over the Democratic Party is waning, and some have suggested he is out of touch with the appeal of Trump. 

For example, political commentator and author Ben Burgess wrote an op-ed after Obama delivered a speech at the Obama Democracy Forum that part of the ‘problem’ is Obama doesn’t understand why Trump won the 2024 election and that the American public should stop listening to the former president. 

‘​​Obama’s characteristic rhetorical virtues were on full display,’ Burgess wrote in December 2024 for MSNBC, following Obama’s speech. ‘He was a constitutional law professor before he was a politician, and he still sounds like one. At the same time, he was a once-in-a-generation talent as a political communicator. He knows how to convey a complex set of ideas in a digestible and appealing way.’ 

‘But there was a massive gaping hole at the center of his speech,’ the op-ed stated. ‘He still doesn’t understand why his eight years in power culminated in the rise of Trump.’ 

‘Fight’ details how Trump secured the White House for a second term and the fallout of his victory for the Democratic Party. It is based on interviews Allen and Parnes conducted with more than 150 political insiders, according to the book’s description. 

Fox News’ Hanna Panreck and Emma Colton contributed to this report. 

FBI Director Kash Patel is tackling China’s influence on American farmlands head-on, as both a food supply and national security concern. 

Patel’s early focus on Chinese influence over American land — particularly farmland near sensitive sites — reflects a broader second-term push by the Trump administration to confront the Chinese Communist Party’s presence on U.S. soil. The effort has gained traction among Republican lawmakers and conservative allies, who say CCP-connected land ownership poses a direct threat to national security and critical infrastructure.

‘FBI Director Kash Patel has made eradicating CCP interference and infiltration in the United States a relentless, uncompromising priority,’ Patel advisor Erica Knight told Fox News Digital. 

‘With his unmatched experience in counterterrorism and intelligence, Patel possesses a profound understanding of the grave threats our nation faces,’ Knight said. ‘His expertise and unwavering resolve make him uniquely equipped to lead the bureau to crush CCP infiltration and safeguard America’s national security.’

Patel recently told lawmakers that the ‘effective resolution’ of the southern border crisis has prompted adversaries like China, Russia, and Iran to shift their focus to the U.S. northern border.

As the administration ramps up its second-term focus on China, President Donald Trump was asked aboard Air Force One on Thursday what the White House is doing about Chinese-owned farmland.

Trump said he is ‘looking at it all the time,’ adding that he has ‘a very good relationship with China and with the president.’

‘I have a lot of respect for President Xi,’ Trump said. 

Trump emphasized that Chinese-owned farmland ‘has been an issue for years.’

In a February Fox News op-ed, Presidential Envoy for Special Missions Ric Grenell echoed growing concern on the right over Chinese-owned farmland, calling it part of a ‘not-so-silent takeover.’

‘While conservative legislators and governors across the country are taking action to stop adversarial nations from buying U.S. farmland, we must recognize that there’s a much broader issue at play here — China’s end goal is not confined to land ownership,’ Grenell wrote. 

Capitol Hill lawmakers have already begun taking action. In early March, Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., introduced the PASS Act in the Senate, which would bar entities from ‘covered countries’ — including China — from purchasing agricultural land near military bases or other sensitive sites.

The legislation, which also has Democratic support, would allow the Department of Agriculture to submit cases to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. for review if the department suspects there is a national security concern. 

Likewise, Republican senators in January also announced the Not One More Inch or Acre Act, led by Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Kevin Cramer of North Dakota and Katie Britt of Alabama. 

The legislation would require selling land owned or ‘influenced’ by the Chinese Communist Party that is deemed to be a national security risk.

Fox News Digital’s Morgan Phillips and Michael Lee contributed to this report. 

: Sen. Jacky Rosen plans to introduce amendments ahead of Friday night’s ‘Vote-A-Rama’ that would roll back President Donald Trump’s tariffs on certain materials on key tourism partners, likely forcing her Republican colleagues to go on record defending the policy again. 

‘President Trump broke his promise to lower costs, and has enacted reckless tariffs that are jacking up prices even higher for hardworking Nevada families and harming my state’s tourism economy,’ Rosen, D-Nev., told Fox News Digital in an exclusive statement. 

‘Donald Trump may not care if his tariffs raise prices, but I do, and that’s why I’m trying to stop his new national sales tax. Every senator should be on the record: Do you stand with America’s working families who need financial relief, or do you stand with Trump in giving his billionaire buddies even more tax giveaways?’ 

The Nevada Democrat’s amendments include one to stop the administration from levying tariffs on critical construction materials for building houses, and one that would bar Trump from putting across-the-board tariffs on countries with many who visit the U.S.

‘I’ve already heard from Nevadans and Nevada business owners who are worried about how these new tariffs will impact their businesses and livelihoods, including the founder of a small business in Reno. They wrote to me saying, quote, ‘We maintain a small production facility in Reno . . . these duties will force us to raise retail prices by 37 percent, and we don’t believe our customers will accept that. This policy could wipe us out entirely,” Rosen said during her debate time on the floor on Friday.

‘They go on to say, quote, ‘I’m not asking for a favor. I’m asking for leadership that reflects the urgency and reality we face. These tariffs do not bring jobs back. They raise prices, punish small businesses, and put livelihoods at risk, all while making it harder for companies like mine to do what we’ve done for 13 years: create jobs, innovate, and support our families,’’ she went on.

On Thursday, Republicans agreed to a motion that kicked off roughly a day’s worth of debate, before the ‘vote-a-rama’ begins. 

A marathon of amendment votes is now expected to take place at some point on Friday after the debate ends. 

During this process, senators can introduce an unlimited number of amendments, and many are expected to get floor votes. 

The ‘vote-a-rama’ marks movement on Trump’s budget for border funding and extending his hallmark 2017 tax cuts, which Republicans in Congress have long been pursuing. This week, the Senate released its changes to the House’s budget reconciliation resolution, taking a big step forward. 

This amendment to the resolution will get a Senate vote at the end of the ‘vote-a-rama.’ 

The expected budget vote comes after months of disagreement between Republicans in the House and Senate, the former of which sought a reconciliation bill to tackle both the border and taxes, while many in the Senate wanted to split it into two bills. 

Ultimately, House Republicans got what they wanted in a one-bill approach, which Trump blessed. 

Whether Russia is ‘serious’ about achieving a ceasefire in Ukraine should become apparent in a ‘matter of weeks,’ Secretary of State Macro Rubio told reporters Friday.

‘The Russians know our position in terms of wanting to end the war, and we will know from their answers very soon whether they are serious about proceeding with real peace or whether it is a delay tactic,’ Rubio said at NATO headquarters in Brussels. 

Questions are mounting over Moscow’s true interest in engaging with the Trump administration after it rejected a 30-day ceasefire proposed by Ukraine in early March, then refused to agree to a Black Sea ceasefire later that month unless sanctions were lifted.

‘[If] It’s a delay tactic, the president’s not interested in that,’ he added. ‘President Trump is not going to fall into the trap of endless negotiations about negotiations.’

When pressed by reporters, Rubio wouldn’t comment on what conditions Russia has set out in securing a peace deal. 

He did note, though, hat even after direct calls with foreign leaders, official readouts don’t always reflect what was actually discussed. That appeared to be the case after President Donald Trump’s call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, when the White House said Russia had ‘agreed’ to eliminate the use of force in the Black Sea.

But the Kremlin later clarified that any agreement was contingent on the West lifting sanctions.

‘I guess it’s part of the game,’ Rubio said. ‘At the end of the day, what’s going to matter here is whether we’re going to move towards peace or not.’

Rubio reiterated that Ukraine and Russia would both need to make concessions to end the war but declined to say what those should be, insisting those details should emerge through negotiations.

‘Initially, it was important to talk [to the Russians] because we haven’t talked to them in a long time. But now we’ve reached the stage [where] we need to make progress,’ he said, noting it will be ‘hard,’ but he remains ‘optimistic.’

‘There are some promising signs. There are some troubling signs. It’s not going to be easy. No one ever said this would be easy, but we’re going to find out sooner rather than later,’ Rubio told reporters. ‘And let’s just say I’m hopeful. I remain hopeful.’

President Donald Trump has fired the head of the National Security Agency (NSA), a high-level move driven by mounting pressure from conservative allies to purge officials they view as insufficiently loyal to the president’s ‘America First’ agenda.

Gen. Timothy Haugh and civilian Deputy Wendy Noble were let go from their roles as director and deputy director of the NSA. Lt. Gen. William Hartman, who also leads U.S. Cyber Command, will serve as acting director, while Sheila Thomas will take over as deputy.

Hartman previously commanded the Cyber National Mission Force and has served in intelligence, cyberspace operations and infantry roles during deployments around the world. Thomas most recently headed NSA’s cryptologic partnership with the U.K. and served as director of engagement and policy at NSA. 

The shake-up comes as some right-wing figures have turned against members of Trump’s national security team. Far-right provocateur Laura Loomer met with Trump this week to share her ‘research’ on officials she believes should be fired. 

As Loomer pointed out on X, both Haugh and Noble were Biden appointees. She seemingly took credit for the firing, claiming Haugh had ‘no place’ in the Trump administration because he was ‘hand-picked’ by former Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley. 

‘Why would we want an NSA Director who was referred to Biden after being hand selected by Milley,’ Ms. Loomer wrote. ‘Why would we want Milley’s hand picked choice for NSA DIRECTOR? We do not! And he was referred for firing.’

The White House and NSA did not respond when asked if Loomer had influenced the president’s decision. 

Trump also fired several National Security Council (NSC) staffers on Thursday, adding to national security advisor Mike Waltz’s recent woes after he accidentally included The Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg in a Signal chat about Houthi strikes.

‘We’re going to let go of people we don’t like, or people we don’t think can do the job, or people who may have loyalties to somebody else,’ Trump told reporters about the firings. He confirmed that NSC members had been fired, but remarked it was not many individuals. 

The NSA shuffle also came after Trump recently let go of C.Q. Brown, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Adm. Lisa Franchetti, former chief of naval operations. 

The White House has insisted Waltz’s job is not under threat. 

‘As the president has made it very clear, Mike Waltz continues to be an important part of his national security team,’ Trump administration press secretary Karoline Leavitt told the media in brief remarks outside the White House’s press room on Monday afternoon. ‘And this case has been closed here at the White House, as far as we are concerned.’ 

Senior Iranian officials are threatening to ramp up the country’s nuclear program as the Trump administration weighs a possible strike against the regime if Tehran does not come to the table for negotiations.

‘The president should be making the regime sweat, pure and simple,’ Behnam Ben Taleblu, an Iran expert and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital.

‘This can be done with strict enforcement of maximum pressure sanctions, and a targeted campaign against regime assets in the region – Yemen being a good example now. Washington will also need to add a critical third element to its otherwise economic and military pressure policy. Maximum support for the Iranian people.’

Lisa Daftari, a Middle East expert and editor-in-chief at The Foreign Desk, told Fox News Digital that while diplomacy often demands negotiation, extending any offer to Iran’s regime, even symbolically, risks legitimizing a government that has spent decades terrorizing its own people and funding proxies like Hamas, the Houthis and Hezbollah.

‘This regime thrives on defiance, not dialogue. That has not changed. For over four decades, the mullahs have understood only one language: might,’ Daftari said.

President Donald Trump told reporters on Air Force One on Thursday that it would be better if the U.S. had direct talks with Iran.

‘I think it goes faster, and you can understand the other side a lot better than if you go through intermediaries,’ Trump said. ‘They wanted to use intermediaries. I don’t think that’s necessarily true anymore. I think they’re concerned. I think they feel vulnerable, and I don’t want them to feel that way.’

Trump also threatened to bomb Iran and impose secondary sanctions on Iranian oil if it did not come to the bargaining table over its nuclear program. Although the president said he preferred to make a deal, Trump did not rule out a military option.
 

‘It will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before,’ President Trump told NBC News last weekend.

The U.S. expanded its deterrence efforts in the region, deploying additional squadrons of fighter jets, bombers, and predator drones to reinforce defensive air-support capabilities. The U.S. is also sending the USS Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group to the region to join USS Harry S. Truman, which has been in the Middle East to fight against the Houthi’s in Yemen.

Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, responded with threats of his own and said that Iran would respond ‘decisively and immediately’ to any threat issued by the U.S. Iran is still floating the idea of indirect talks, something the administration is reportedly considering.

Taleblu said, ‘Tehran’s counteroffer of indirect talks is the regime’s way of rejecting Trump while leaving the door open for talks that can be used as a shield against a potential preemptive attack.’

The president sent a letter to Khamenei expressing interest in making a deal on the nuclear issue. While increasing its military presence in the region, reports indicate that the Trump administration is considering indirect talks with Iran to curb the expansion of its nuclear program and avoid a direct confrontation.

Experts and observers of the region warn that Iran has used negotiating as a delaying tactic in the past and warn the Trump administration against entering into talks that might further embolden Iran.

‘The Trump administration should impose full pressure on the regime in Iran given how weak the regime has become in the last several years. Indirect talks are the regime’s strategy of buying time so it can live to fight another day,’ Alireza Nader, an independent analyst in Washington, D.C., and expert on Iran, told Fox News Digital.

Nader’s recommendation to Trump is to support the people of Iran and argued that the regime is much weaker than it appears.

‘President Trump really wants a deal. Iran has a chance here to go back and negotiate, keep its civilian nuclear program but make concessions about its size and the duration of a deal,’ Alex Vatanka, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Fox News Digital.

‘Trump is in a dominant position. Republicans in Congress fear him. Nothing can stop him—at least for now. But power is fickle. The longer he’s in the White House, the more vulnerable he may become. Iran shouldn’t wait for that,’ Vatanka added.

In an interview with Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies podcast, ‘The Iran Breakdown,’ former Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid said that eventually, Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear facility, with or without the United States, because there is no other choice, according to Lapid.

Ali Larijani, an advisor to the supreme leader, said in an interview that although Iran does not seek a nuclear weapon, Tehran will have no choice but to build a nuclear weapon if the U.S. or Israel strike Iran.

The International Atomic Energy Agency reported in February that Iran has accelerated its nuclear program and has enriched uranium close to weapons-grade levels. 

Danielle Pletka, senior fellow in Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), told Fox News Digital that having additional military assets in the Middle East is sound policy given the threats that the U.S. and its allies face in the region.

For Pletka, the question is, what is the Trump administration looking for?

‘A deal in which the Iranians do not fully get rid of their nuclear weapons program? If so, the president sets the United States up for the risk that Barack Obama inflicted on our allies and ourselves – merely delaying the Iranian nuclear program to a later date,’ Pletka told Fox News Digital.

Pletka said it is strange that President Trump seems to envision a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)-like deal, and that has prompted a lot of criticism on Capitol Hill. 

Trump originally withdrew from JCPOA, also known as the Iran nuclear deal, during his first term in 2018 and reapplied harsh economic sanctions. The Biden administration had initially looked at re-engaging with Iran on the nuclear issue upon taking office, but on-again-off-again talks went nowhere, complicated by Iran’s domestic politics and its role in supporting its terror groups in the region.

The other risk that the president runs, according to AEI’s Pletka, is being perceived as a paper tiger.

‘He threatened Hamas with bombing that he never delivered. Now he’s threatening Iran with military action. But does he really mean it? Or is he just blowing hot air?’ she said.

Pletka said, ‘There is an enormous amount of uncertainty around the president’s intentions, and that uncertainty is an opportunity for the Iranians to exploit.’

The Middle East Institute’s Vatanka said he believed that Trump could claim a potential win he can sell at home and say he got a better deal than President Obama did with the JCPOA, if Iran were to agree to permanently keep its enrichment level to a low level, unlike the expiration dates included in the JCPOA.