Inside Trump’s Power Game: Vance on Trial as Iran Talks Intensify. If the deal works, Trump wins. If it fails—Vance takes the fall.
As high-stakes negotiations with Iran edge toward a possible breakthrough, Vice President JD Vance has emerged as an unlikely central figure in the Trump administration’s diplomatic push—while also becoming the subject of quiet internal scrutiny.
According to people familiar with the discussions, President Donald Trump has been privately gauging Vance’s performance, even asking advisers how he compares to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The comparison, while informal, carries political weight, given both men are seen as potential contenders for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination.
The moment marks a sharp shift for Vance, who once expressed skepticism about entering a war with Iran but now finds himself leading efforts to end it. His role in recent talks in Islamabad—alongside envoys including Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner—has placed him at the center of one of the administration’s most consequential foreign policy challenges.
Trump, by his own admission, is watching closely. In private remarks relayed by aides, the president has joked that Vance will bear the blame if negotiations fail, while credit will flow upward if they succeed. The comments, half in jest, reflect a familiar dynamic in Trump’s orbit: high visibility brings both opportunity and risk.
Publicly, the White House has offered full backing. Officials describe Vance as a key negotiator, emphasizing his direct engagement with intermediaries, including Pakistan’s military leadership, as efforts continue to revive stalled talks.
But the pressure extends beyond diplomacy. The Iran conflict has become a political liability at home, with rising energy prices and war fatigue weighing on voters ahead of midterm elections. Vance himself has acknowledged the policy’s unpopularity, particularly among younger Americans, even as he defends the administration’s approach.
His balancing act has been evident elsewhere. During a recent dispute between Trump and Pope Leo XIV, Vance adopted a more measured tone—signaling loyalty to the president while attempting to avoid alienating religious conservatives.
The broader challenge is one of positioning. For a vice president with limited prior foreign policy exposure, the Iran talks represent both a proving ground and a potential vulnerability. His involvement in Hungary’s recent election campaign, which ended in defeat for Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, has already raised questions about political judgment.
Now, with negotiations potentially set to resume, the stakes are clearer. Ending the Iran war could reset the administration’s narrative heading into elections. Failure, however, risks deepening both geopolitical instability and domestic political strain.
In that sense, Vance’s role is no longer just diplomatic—it is defining.
