US Congress panel demands full public hearing on Iran war as concerns mount

In a letter led by Ranking Member Adam Smith and signed by every Democratic member of the committee, the lawmakers urged Chairman Mike Rogers to convene a separate hearing on the conflict, apart from routine budget and posture hearings, and to require the Department of War to explain its objectives, operational plans, and costs.

The Democrats noted that the war has already resulted in the deaths of 13 US service members and 290 wounded, along with more than a thousand civilian deaths. They expressed concern about the lack of clarity on possible US ground operations, shifting strategic and operational objectives, and reports that the administration intends to request a $200 billion supplemental budget for the conflict.

The letter stressed that existing committee hearings with the Secretary of Defence and senior military leaders would not allow sufficient time and attention to the gravity and complexity of the conflict.

The lawmakers wrote that transparency is critical, saying: “We are deeply troubled by the lack of transparency from the Trump Administration and the Department of Defence and its failure to keep Congress and the American people informed.”

As the war enters its second month, Pakistan has emerged as a key diplomatic intermediary, relaying ceasefire proposals between Washington and Tehran.

Lisa Curtis, the Senior Director for South and Central Asia on the US National Security Council during Trump’s first administration (2017‑2021), noted that Pakistan’s role may surprise observers but reflects evolving regional dynamics.

Curtis, now a director at the Centre for a New American Security, wrote that if successful, Pakistan’s mediation would strengthen its diplomatic credentials and US ties.

In a commentary titled “Pakistan’s Iran Mediation Gambit Likely to Boost Ties with the Trump Administration“, she wrote: “It may be surprising to some that Pakistan has taken on the risky role of a key mediator between the United States and Iran to try to end the war entering its second month.”

Multiple reports indicate that Iran is expected to respond soon to a 15‑point US ceasefire plan relayed via Pakistan, though Tehran has already dismissed portions of the proposal, describing them as heavily biased toward US and Israeli demands.

Commentaries in Foreign Affairs magazine warn that ending the conflict will not be straightforward. Analysts note that Tehran has rejected the US plan and issued its own counter-proposals, meaning the deadlock is likely to persist unless concessions are made by both sides.

The magazine also highlights a growing risk of a US ground invasion as Washington deploys thousands of marines to the region.

The publication underscores the complexity of Gulf dynamics, noting that Arab states are not pro-Iranian but are increasingly questioning the value of their alignment with Washington.

Analysts argue that Iran’s long-term strategy aims not to defeat the United States militarily but to make its presence in the Gulf politically costly for Arab hosts, undermining basing rights, intelligence sharing, and military financing.

US scholars urge that a mediating coalition of countries with influence on both Washington and Tehran — including Pakistan — must work urgently to secure a seriously negotiated ceasefire, one capable of holding, unlike a temporary truce announced in June.

The US has launched over 850 Tomahawk cruise missiles against Iran—about nine times its usual annual procurement, CBS News reported Saturday, citing administration sources.

Despite a maximum production capacity of 2,330 missiles per year, the Pentagon typically buys only around 90 annually.

For fiscal year 2026, the US Navy requested just 57. The total inventory is estimated at roughly 3,100 missiles.

“It’s been recognised that we don’t have enough long-range strike capability, so we’ve been trying to build up these stockpiles—but we keep depleting them,” said Kelly Grieco, senior fellow at the Stimson Center.