Democratic gains in Congress could diminish the influence of lawmakers at both ends of the party while creating new obstacles for President Donald Trump’s foreign policy, according to an analysis published by Above the Law.

The opinion piece identified Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania as one of the election’s political losers, even though he was not described as having lost a race. Its argument centered instead on the leverage a single senator can wield in a narrowly divided chamber.

Had Democrats secured only 51 or 52 Senate seats, Fetterman, a Democrat who sometimes supports Republican positions, could have held outsized influence over the party’s legislation. The article compared that possibility with the role former Sen. Joe Manchin played when Democrats depended on nearly every member of their caucus.

With a larger majority, the analysis argued, Democratic leaders would be better positioned to pass bills without Fetterman’s vote. The same arithmetic could also reduce the leverage of senators on the party’s left flank, whose support would be more critical in a narrowly controlled Senate.

The article also assessed potential international consequences. It suggested that Russian President Vladimir Putin could face a more resistant Congress, with Democrats better placed to support Ukraine, press for sanctions and challenge Russian aggression. Presidents retain substantial authority over foreign affairs, however, and congressional majorities do not guarantee a particular policy outcome.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was another figure the piece identified as potentially weakened, arguing that his close relationship with Trump could become less advantageous as the president’s party loses political ground.

The outlook for Iran was presented as more complicated. Although the article suggested Tehran might benefit politically from Republican losses, it also predicted that Trump could order further military action before the new Congress convenes in January. That was speculation, not a reported administration plan.

The analysis questioned what additional strikes would accomplish and noted difficult decisions facing lawmakers who favor ending military action, including how to address Iran’s nuclear ambitions and its influence over the Strait of Hormuz.

For Republicans, the article argued, the election represented both a loss of seats and a test of the party’s relationship with Trump. It contended that Trump has shown greater concern for his own electoral standing than for the fortunes of other Republicans—a sharply critical interpretation of the party’s predicament as it prepares to confront a stronger Democratic opposition.