US House votes to make Trump end the war with Iran
For the first time since the conflict began three months ago, one chamber of Congress demands a US military pullout from the war with Iran, with four Republicans crossing the aisle.
- The House of Representatives passed a resolution 215 to 208 demanding a US military pullout from the war with Iran.
- Four Republicans crossed the aisle, the first such vote since the conflict began three months ago.
- The vote is largely symbolic, as the measure would almost certainly be struck down by a Trump veto.
- On the same day, Trump said talks with Iran were going well and a deal could come over the weekend.
The US House of Representatives passed a war powers resolution on Wednesday, June 3, demanding that President Donald Trump withdraw American armed forces from hostilities with Iran, the first time a chamber of Congress has formally called for an exit from a war now in its third month. For readers in Belgrade, who have tracked the conflict’s impact on energy prices and Middle East stability from day one, the Washington vote signals that space for a diplomatic wind-down is opening inside the American government itself.
The resolution passed by a narrow margin, 215 votes to 208. The text orders the president to pull forces out of the conflict with Iran unless Congress explicitly declares war or authorizes the use of force, a reminder of the legislature’s constitutional authority over questions of war and peace.
Who crossed the aisle?
The decisive shift came from Republicans who broke with the party line. Four voted for the resolution: Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Tom Barrett of Michigan, and Warren Davidson of Ohio. They were joined by Democrat Jared Golden of Maine, who had voted against similar measures three times before but backed the pullout this time.
Fitzpatrick framed his vote around the constitutional order.
The law is the law. We have to follow the law.
Opponents held that the measure weakens the president at a delicate moment. Republican Brian Mast, one of the loudest critics, called the vote a damaging political stunt.
A stupid political vote that weakens the president’s hand.
The vote should also be read against earlier turning points in this conflict. After the US strike on Qeshm, Iran targeted American bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, while the talks led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio were repeatedly broken off and resumed. The House resolution is now the first legislative response to that chain of escalation.
What does the vote actually change?
In practice, little for now. The measure is largely symbolic, as it would almost certainly be struck down by a presidential veto, and Democrats failed earlier to push a similar text through the Senate. The political weight of the vote is different: for the first time, part of the Republican majority appears unwilling to follow Trump unconditionally into an open war.
The president himself struck a more conciliatory tone the same day. Trump said talks with Iran were going very well and that a deal could be reached as early as the weekend. That opens two parallel tracks:
- legislative pressure from Congress for a troop pullout,
- presidential diplomacy promising a possible agreement with Tehran.
For European foreign ministries, including those watching the fallout for the Balkans, the key question is whether these two tracks will converge into a genuine de-escalation or remain a contest of domestic politics in Washington.
Do you think the House vote can actually speed up the end of the war with Iran, or is this a message aimed at the American home audience?
