Trump warns he’s considering limited strikes on Iran and says Tehran ‘better negotiate a fair deal’

President Donald Trump warned on Friday that limited strikes against Iran are possible even as the country’s top diplomat said Tehran expects to have a proposed deal ready in the next few days following nuclear talks with the United States.

In response to a reporter’s question on whether the U.S. could take limited military action as the countries negotiate, Trump said, “I guess I can say I am considering that.” A few hours later, he told reporters that Iran “better negotiate a fair deal.”

Earlier Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in a TV interview that his country was planning to finalize a draft deal in “the next two to three days” to send to Washington.

“I don’t think it takes long, perhaps, in a matter of a week or so, we can start real, serious negotiations on the text and come to a conclusion,” Araghchi said on MSNOW’s “Morning Joe” show.

The tensions between the longtime adversaries have ramped up as the Trump administration pushes for concessions from Iran and has built up the largest U.S. military presence in the Middle East in decades, with more warships and aircraft on the way.

On Friday, the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group passed through the Strait of Gibraltar and entered the Mediterranean Sea after being sent by Trump from the Caribbean, according to images of the ship by maritime photographers posted to social media.

Both Iran and the U.S. have signaled that they are prepared for war if talks on Tehran’s nuclear program fizzle out. “We are prepared for diplomacy, and we are prepared for negotiation as much as we are prepared for war,” Araghchi said Friday.

Ali Vaez, an Iran expert at the International Crisis Group, said Iran “would treat any kinetic action as an existential threat.”

Vaez said he doesn’t think Iran’s leaders are bluffing when they say they would retaliate, while they likely believe they could maintain their hold on power despite any U.S. airstrikes.

What Iran and the US are negotiating

Trump said a day earlier that he believes 10 to 15 days is “enough time” for Iran to reach a deal following recent rounds of indirect negotiations, including this week in Geneva, that made little visible progress. But the talks have been deadlocked for years after Trump’s decision in 2018 to unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers. Since then, Iran has refused to discuss wider U.S. and Israeli demands that it scale back its missile program and sever ties to armed groups.

Araghchi also said Friday that his American counterparts have not asked for zero enrichment of uranium as part of the latest round of talks, which is not what U.S. officials have said publicly.

“What we are now talking about is how to make sure that Iran’s nuclear program, including enrichment, is peaceful and will remain peaceful forever,” he said.

He added that in return, Iran will implement some confidence-building measures in exchange for relief on economic sanctions.

In response to Araghchi’s claim, a White House official said Trump has been clear that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons or the capacity to build them and that it cannot enrich uranium. The official wasn’t authorized to comment publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Tehran has long insisted that any negotiations should only focus on its nuclear program and that it hasn’t been enriching uranium since U.S. and Israeli strikes last June on Iranian nuclear sites. Trump said at the time that the strikes had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear sites, but the exact damage is unknown as Tehran has barred international inspectors.

Although Iran insists its nuclear program is peaceful, the U.S. and others suspect it is aimed at eventually developing weapons.

What Congress has to say

Trump’s comments have faced pushback from some lawmakers who say the president should get Congress’ approval before any strike.

Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia said Friday that he has filed a war powers resolution that would require that step. Though it has no chance of becoming law — in part because Trump himself would have to sign it — some bipartisan consensus has arisen recently among senators who forced votes on previous resolutions on military action in Venezuela.

None of those resolutions passed, but they were successful in showing how lawmakers are troubled by some of Trump’s aggressive foreign policy maneuvers.

“If some of my colleagues support war, then they should have the guts to vote for the war, and to be held accountable by their constituents, rather than hiding under their desks,” Kaine said in a statement.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com