Financial Times Gets U.N. Ambassador Waltz Wrong

The Financial Times reported this morning that the Trump administration is prepared for a “long standoff” with Iran, citing comments from U.N. Ambassador Mike Waltz. The article also says that Waltz “acknowledged that a year from now the US could still be mired in a stalemate with Iran, without a deal on Tehran’s nuclear programme or a return to prewar shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.” There is just one problem: Waltz never said any of that.

The article was a snippet of a longer podcast interview between FT reporter Abigail Hauslohner and Waltz, formerly the national security adviser and comfortably on the hawkish side of the ledger.

About the Author

Tanner Nau

Tanner Nau is a Reporting Fellow at National Review, based in Washington, D.C. He previously worked at The Free Press.

Featured Tags

Manage following

Iran

Mike Waltz

The Financial Times reported this morning that the Trump administration is prepared for a “long standoff” with Iran, citing comments from U.N. Ambassador Mike Waltz. The article also says that Waltz “acknowledged that a year from now the US could still be mired in a stalemate with Iran, without a deal on Tehran’s nuclear programme or a return to prewar shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.” There is just one problem: Waltz never said any of that.

The article was a snippet of a longer podcast interview between FT reporter Abigail Hauslohner and Waltz, formerly the national security adviser and comfortably on the hawkish side of the ledger.