Has Trump succeeded in making Vance the face of America's humiliation by Iran?

US President Donald Trump on multiple occasions, albeit in jest, suggested that if the Iran talks failed, he would blame JD Vance for it. Trump sent Vance for negotiations to Geneva, and the developments suggest that the Vice President might actually be emerging as the face of America's humiliation by Iran.

JD Vance, the Vice President of the US, finds himself in a precarious position. Tasked with securing a lasting peace deal to end the conflict with Iran, Vance knows that failure will come at a steep cost. His boss, US President Donald Trump, has now twice signalled, once lightly, once more pointedly, that his deputy will be the one to take the fall. Trump, it seems, has managed to turn Vance into the face of the public humiliation being delivered to the US by Iran. With Vance at the forefront, the daggers are out for him as the negotiations with Iran don't seem to be moving as intended.

That Vance is now the face of the negotiations was made clear on Sunday. During talks in Geneva, the Iranian delegation, led by chief negotiator Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, stormed out of a scheduled photo-op with the American negotiators. While the Iranians humiliated the American side over fresh rhetorical threats from Trump in Washington, Vance was left to absorb the immediate public backlash.

Trump's 14-point tentative peace framework has already drawn sharp criticism at home, particularly from Republican national security hawks who view the proposed concessions, including the lifting of oil sanctions and the unlocking of frozen assets, as an American capitulation.

In a striking irony, it is Vance, the administration's most vocal sceptic of Middle Eastern entanglements, who has been thrust forward as the deal's chief defender. Meanwhile, traditional hardliners such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth have quietly stepped back, leaving Vance to face the rotten tomatoes on the podium.

The stakes for Vance could hardly be higher. Trump has turned him into the most visible champion of a peace deal with Iran. Should he succeed in extracting a mutually agreeable deal with Iran, it will undoubtedly bolster his political career. Should he fail, Trump will undoubtedly make him the face of the humiliation by Iran.

A Republican strategist told the BBC that Trump had "ceded the limelight" deliberately, while another referred to the situation as the President having thrown "JD under the bus".

IRAN DEAL UNDER FIRE, TRUMP TURNS TO VANCE

To understand why being associated with this deal is dangerous for Vance, it is first worth understanding just how toxic the framework has become.

The 14-point interim peace agreement, signed in Versailles last week, has ignited a political firestorm within Trump's own Republican Party. Conservatives across Capitol Hill have lined up to denounce it as a humiliating capitulation to Tehran.

Senator Bill Cassidy was among the first to attack the framework, declaring on X that "Ronald Reagan is rolling over in his grave" and warning that Iran's nuclear ambitions remained unchecked while Tehran had learnt that maritime coercion pays dividends. "This is the worst foreign policy blunder in decades," he said.

Senator Ted Cruz focused his fire on the financial concessions embedded in the agreement, warning that funds released under the deal would ultimately "be used to murder Americans." Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker pointed to the proposed $300 billion international reconstruction fund, arguing it made Obama's 2015 nuclear deal "look like a pittance by comparison."

The backlash has extended beyond Capitol Hill. On June 19, the New York Post — a traditionally administration-friendly outlet — published a scathing editorial headlined: "With Strait of Hormuz held hostage, Trump's Iran deal is worse than Obama's."

Yet even as criticism mounted from within his own party, Trump appeared largely unfazed. Asked on June 17 who would bear responsibility if the preliminary agreement collapsed, the president turned to his Vice President with a grin. "If it works out, I'm going to take the credit. If it doesn't work out, I'm blaming JD," Trump quipped. "You better be careful, JD."

Jest or not, the message was simple. The blame for a less than acceptable, or even failed deal with Iran, would not fall on the President, but rather, his deputy.

HOW VANCE TURNED INTO A DEFENDER OF TRUMP's IRAN DEAL

What makes Vance's position particularly striking is who he is, and who has been allowed to step aside.

Vance was, until recently, the administration's most vocal sceptic of Middle Eastern entanglements. He had been among the strongest internal voices against the US launching a war with Iran. Yet it is Vance who has been thrust forward as the deal's chief public champion, while traditional hardliners like Rubio and Hegseth have quietly retreated to the background, leaving him isolated at the front.

A White House statement last week formalised his exposure, describing Vance as the president's "right-hand man" and crediting him with leading the negotiations "alongside Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner". The statement ensured his name was on the deal in black and white.

Vance has taken to the role with visible energy. Before flying to Geneva, he strongly defended the interim framework, pushed back against Republican critics, and even warned Israel — which has publicly condemned the deal — not to attack its "only ally". He insisted that lifting sanctions would be "a real benefit to the American people" and flatly rejected the notion that Washington was surrendering leverage. "The US isn't giving up a cent of money to Iran," he declared.

The performance has been robust. But Vance's name is now inseparable from the deal's fate. And that, several observers suggest, is precisely the point.

REPUBLICANS ARE TURNING AGAINST VANCE

Within Republican circles, some have already begun branding the interim Iran deal, seen by many as giving Iran too many concessions, "Vance's deal." This conveniently creates distance between Trump and the fallout, should the talks collapse.

Conservative commentator Marc Thiessen described the agreement on X as "the Vance peace deal." Ben Domenech derided it as a pact negotiated by "some kind of Hillbilly Obama" — a pointed reference to Vance. Even podcaster Ben Shapiro weighed in on Fox News, saying that "the vice president, the chief negotiator on this project, has not well-served the president".

Notice the framing: not that Trump's deal has problems, but that Vance has failed Trump.

Republican strategists are also drawing the same conclusion. "It's not in the president's nature to cede the limelight, and he's done that here," Matt Mackowiak told the BBC. "That does feel like a deliberate choice." A longtime Republican operative, speaking anonymously, was more direct, telling the BBC "It's classic Trump to throw JD under the bus."

The political geometry is now fully visible. If Vance delivers a credible, lasting agreement with Iran, he will have played a central role in achieving a longtime goal of the US and its allies in the Middle East. That would be a significant boost for Vance, who is widely viewed as a potential contender for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination.

But if the US-Iran talks collapse, and Sunday's walkout in Geneva suggests that remains a real possibility, the scapegoat for the Iranian humiliation has already been identified. As one White House insider told the US news outlet, Politico, "The vice president will get credit. Whether that’s good or bad remains to be seen."

- Ends