John Cornyn on Military and Defense

Cornyn’s post calls the agreement “a good deal,” approving what Trump announced, and adds that it is “fair to ask” whether it could have been reached without “the diplomatic damage,” which questions the route to the deal rather than its terms or Trump’s description of them. He neither mentions nor disputes “permanent control.” The wording is the wording the Journal’s Opinion account used for the same editorial, so the record attributes the position to Cornyn through his choice to post it under his own name, with no comment of his own. The closest competing label is “Mixed or conditional”, because of the reservation about diplomatic damage; it loses because that reservation concerns how the deal was reached, not what it provides.