WASHINGTON: United States President Donald Trump’s decision to place military options against Iran back on the table follows widening political divisions at home, where Democrats increasingly frame the confrontation as economically damaging, strategically inconsistent and politically risky.

The negotiations with Tehran have stalled over Iran’s demand for reciprocal recognition, while the White House is intensifying diplomatic pressure and escalating war rhetoric — a combination that may further constrain efforts to secure a peace agreement in the weeks ahead.

According to Axios, Trump hardened his rhetoric after expressing frustration with Tehran’s latest response to a US peace proposal, which he reportedly described as “totally unacceptable.”

In a phone interview with Axios, the president warned that “the clock is ticking” and threatened that Iran would be “hit much harder” if it failed to revise its position.

“We want to make a deal. They are not where we want them to be,” Trump said. “They will have to get there, or they will be hit badly.”

The tougher posture reflects a White House increasingly balancing two competing imperatives: projecting deterrence abroad while containing growing scepticism at home over the costs and objectives of a prolonged confrontation with Iran.

Axios also reported that Trump plans to convene a Situation Room meeting on Tuesday with senior national security officials — including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and special envoy Steve Witkoff — to review military contingencies if diplomacy collapses entirely. He is also believed to have consulted some of them on Sunday.

Trump’s parallel consultations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu further underscore Israel’s continuing influence over Washington’s calculations regarding Iran.

Yet while the administration intensifies military signalling, the domestic political backlash is becoming increasingly visible.

Congressional Democrats have launched a coordinated campaign to constrain Trump’s war powers through repeated War Powers Resolution votes, contentious congressional hearings and a broader effort to link foreign policy escalation directly to economic anxieties among American voters ahead of the next election cycle.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer has framed the war not merely as a foreign policy dispute but as a strategic gift to America’s rivals.

“The American people may not be benefiting from Trump’s war, but our adversaries certainly are,” Schumer said in a statement.

“Trump is allowing China to present itself as a source of stability and reason on the world stage, and Russia is raking in record profits from its energy exports.”

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries has similarly argued that “temporary ceasefires are insufficient” and that “the administration lacks a coherent exit strategy”.

Other Democrats, including Representative Ro Khanna, have focused on domestic economic consequences, accusing the administration of aggravating inflation and fuel prices despite earlier campaign promises to reduce living costs.

Although attempts to force troop withdrawals have so far failed narrowly in Congress, the persistence of the challenge reflects concern extending beyond the Democratic Party’s progressive wing.

A recent House procedural vote reportedly ended in a rare 212-212 tie, while Senate efforts have attracted limited Republican support despite the likelihood of a presidential veto.

Meanwhile, former US congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene said on X, “If you send in US military troops into Iran, there is going to be a political revolution in America.”

Greene, a former Trump ally, said, “WE. ARE. DONE. We said no more foreign wars and we meant it. The coalition will unite and be unstoppable. I’ll make sure of it. End this war. It’s stupid.”