The Memo: Trump pumps brakes, lightly, on joining Israel's assault on Iran
President Trump is pumping the brakes, at least for the moment, on direct U.S. engagement in Israel's assault on Iran.
On Thursday, Trump determined that he would make a 'decision on whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' according to a statement read by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.
Trump had also determined there was 'a chance for substantial negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future,' Leavitt said.
But that pause could be unpaused at any moment, given Trump's mercurial nature, the volatility of the situation in the Middle East and the voices within American politics arguing that the time is ripe for the U.S. to deliver a decisive blow on Israel's behalf.
Trump on Friday said the two-week period was the 'maximum' period that would elapse before he decided on the question.
That left the overall positive muddy — but it also gave Trump some room to maneuver.
And even his current equivocal stance shows him edging back toward his more anti-interventionist 'America First' instincts.
That is a turn from earlier in the week, when Trump had seemed right on the brink of sending American forces in some capacity to back Israel's assault.
At that point, he had bragged on social media that 'we' had control of the skies over Iran and, in a separate all-caps post, appeared to demand Iran's 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!'
Trump's fuzzy position since then reflects several different facts.
First, for all his aggressiveness on the domestic stage, Trump has long been skeptical of foreign adventuring. In his first run for the presidency — a campaign that began a decade ago — he was critical of former President George W. Bush's war in Iraq, to an extent that was highly unusual for a Republican candidate.
Relatedly, Trump's apparent flirting with war provoked significant pushback from influential figures within his Make America Great Again (MAGA) base.
The most prominent of these is Tucker Carlson, whose skeptical questioning of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) during a long interview went viral in recent days.
Carlson, former chief strategist Steve Bannon and widely-watched influencers on the online right such as Theo Von have all argued that the dangers of getting sucked into a new Middle East war are acute.
Then there is broader American public opinion to consider. There seems remarkably little appetite among the public for direct U.S. involvement in an attack on Iran. A Washington Post poll released on Wednesday found 45 percent opposed to U.S. airstrikes on Iran, just 25 percent supporting such action and 30 percent undecided.
So, it's no surprise that Trump is returning to a long-established tactic of playing for time.
As some sardonic media reports have noted since Thursday's 'two weeks' pronouncement, this is a timescale he has cited in the past for things that have never ultimately happened.
One example was a promise to produce a detailed health plan that would purportedly replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA) passed under President Obama. He has also cited 'two weeks' as a timeframe by which various facets of his views on the war in Ukraine would become clear.
On Iran, the president is to be sure under some pressure from those who believe this is a rare opportunity to strike at Iran, debilitate its uranium enrichment capacity for good and perhaps topple the nation's theocratic leadership.
This school of thought holds that Iranian proxies and allies like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza and the former regime of Bashar Assad in Syria have been so worn down (in the case of the first two) or removed (in the case of Assad) that stronger action is possible today than would have been the case even a couple of years ago.
The Trump administration has its fair share of vehement supporters of expansive Israeli power.
For example, Trump's ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, has in the past been supportive of Israel's decades-long occupation of the West Bank, despite that occupation being deemed illegal by numerous interpretations of international law.
Huckabee also wrote Trump a message in recent days — which Trump duly published on social media — in which the ambassador suggested that Trump was positioned to act as a vehicle of divine will regarding Israel.
Yet another wrinkle in Trump's approach is his seeming split with his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, on the question of whether Iran is actively seeking a nuclear weapon.
Gabbard's belief flies in the face of the purported Israeli rationale for the attack on Iran. But on Friday, Trump was confronted by a reporter on the question.
The reporter asked what evidence Trump had that Iran is building a nuclear weapon and said U.S. intelligence had reported that it had not seen such evidence.
'Well then, my intelligence community is wrong,' Mr. Trump insisted. 'Who in the intelligence community said that?'
When the reporter named Gabbard, Trump shot back, 'She's wrong.'
Gabbard, a former Democratic congresswoman, is renowned for her general skepticism of American interventionism.
Trump appears to yet hold out some hope of a breakthrough in talks with Iran. His envoy Steve Witkoff remains engaged on the issue.
Any major Iranian concessions at this point would allow Trump to claim — as he often likes to do — that his high-risk approach to diplomatic negotiation had paid off.
On the other hand, it's hard to see how any deal between the U.S. and Iran would placate the Israeli government led by Benjamin Netanyahu.
Indeed, the possibility of such a deal in the first place is seen by some as one of the reasons Netanyahu launched the assault on Iran in the first place.
For now, Trump has bought himself some time. But there are risks in every direction.
The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
26 minutes ago
- New York Post
RFK Jr. blasts offshore windmill farms for harming marine life as he tries to save whales and ostriches: ‘Make no economic sense'
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wants to save the whales along with the ostriches. The Secretary of Health & Human Services — who recently went to bat for nearly 400 ostriches threatened by the bird flu in Canada — doubled down Sunday on his contention that offshore windmills need to be banned because they threaten whales and other marine life. The offshore contraptions also are a costly bust as a clean-energy alternative to fossil fuels, Kennedy told WABC 770 AM's the 'Cats Roundtable' program. 7 Secretary of Health & Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. doubled down Sunday on his contention that offshore windmills need to be banned. Getty Images 'We've had 109 whale groundings in the last 22 months. And they're all in the proximity of these new offshore wind farms,' said the Kennedy scion — who once famously cut off a dead whale's head on the beach and strapped it to the roof of the family's car to bring it home to reportedly study it. 'In the 20 years before that, the average whale grounding was 2.6 per year,' he told host John Catsimatidis. 'Many of these [whales] are critically endangered species. … We are going to exterminate these whales,' RFK Jr. said. 'When you put a windmill up, the cod disappear, the groundfish disappear. The fishermen are going out of business.' 7 'In the 20 years before that, the average whale grounding was 2.6 per year,' he told host John Catsimatidis. Lois GoBe – He added that many of the offshore wind companies operating in the US are foreign-owned and partner with American firms to receive massive subsidies under former President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. 'The energy that they produce is three times the cost of an onshore wind plant. They make no economic sense,' Kennedy said. President Trump has already issued an executive order blocking approval of all new offshore wind projects, which are opposed by residents and elected officials in New York and New Jersey shore communities. 7 Many of the offshore wind companies operating in the US are foreign-owned and partner with American firms to receive massive subsidies. gudkovandrey – The president did allow one controversial offshore wind project off Long Island's coast to proceed, at the behest of Gov. Kathy Hochul and Big Apple Mayor Eric Adams. It had already received all the necessary approvals and promised an estimated 1,000 local jobs. The project, known as Empire Wind 1, is just one cog in New York's grander push to become fossil fuel-free by 2050 and is set to power 500,000 homes through green energy provided by wind turbines. But it faces steep criticism from Nassau County officials, who agree with Kennedy that the project threatens marine life and the local fishing industry. Kennedy said Sunday that he speaks to Trump 'all the time' about his opposition to offshore windmills. 7 President Trump has already issued an executive order blocking approval of all new offshore wind projects. AP As an environmental lawyer, he helped block a proposed offshore wind farm near his family's compound in Cape Cod. Trump himself is a staunch opponent of offshore wind, too, saying, 'We're not going to do the wind thing. 'Big, ugly windmills, they ruin your neighborhood. 'They destroy everything, they're horrible, the most expensive energy there is,' Trump has said. 'They ruin the environment, they kill the birds, they kill the whales.' 7 Kennedy said Sunday that he speaks to Trump 'all the time' about his opposition to offshore windmills. EcoView – 7 Trump himself is a staunch opponent of offshore wind, too, saying, 'We're not going to do the wind thing.' AP As for Kennedy and the ostriches, he has been appealing to Canadian officials to save the birds as part of a campaign with Catsimatidis. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has said it needs to kill hundreds of ostriches at the Universal Ostrich Farm in British Columbia to curb the spread of the avian flu there. RFK Jr., who owns an emu, stuck his neck out for the birds and is hopeful that doesn't happen. He said the ostriches survived the avian bird flu and they should be studied to determine how they became immune. 7 Kennedy has been appealing to Canadian officials to save the birds as part of a campaign with Catsimatidis. halberg – TV's Dr. Oz, who works closely with RFK as the administrator of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, even offered his Florida ranch as a refuge for the ostriches. 'We want to get antibodies out of them. They survived bird flu. Why did they survive?,' RFK Jr. said. 'We need to know that because there are a lot of other birds that died from it.' He blamed 'bureaucratic corruption' and the lust for power for wanting to cull the ostriches.
Fox News
26 minutes ago
- Fox News
'Squad' erupts in fury as Trump takes bold action against Iranian nuclear threat
Members of the congressional "Squad" unleashed sharp criticism of President Donald Trump after he ordered a barrage of missile and bomb strikes on Iranian nuclear sites late Saturday. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., was the most vocal of all, tweeting several times about the offensive. Responding to cryptocurrency exchange CEO Arjun Sethi's comment about U.S. "elites" being most united by war "especially against Muslims in the Middle East," Tlaib remarked, "Yep and it's so f---ing sick." "President Trump sending US troops to bomb Iran without the consent of Congress is a blatant violation of the Constitution. The American people do not want another forever war," Tlaib added in a separate message. "Instead of listening to the American people, Trump is listening to War Criminal Netanyahu who lied about Iraq and is lying once again about Iran. Congress must act immediately to exert its war powers and stop this unconstitutional war." She also retweeted right-wing Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who had commented "this (strike) is not constitutional." Squad Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., echoed Tlaib's concerns about "endless war," and called Trump and Netanyahu "warmongers." "It is the people who suffer the illegal & irresponsible actions of authoritarian leaders," she said. "Only Congress has the power to declare war. We must act to protect our safety and shared humanity." Rep. Gregorio Casar, D-Texas, a newer member of the far-left congressional group, claimed it is "illegal" for Trump to act as he did. "Congress should immediately pass a War Powers Resolution to block Trump from carrying out an unconstitutional war," the Austin lawmaker said. "My entire adult life, politicians have promised that new wars in the Middle East would be quick and easy. Then they sent other people's children to fight and die endlessly. Enough." The most recognizable Squad member, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., called Trump's decision "disastrous" and said striking Iran without congressional authorization "a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers." "He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations," Ocasio-Cortez went on, adding that Trump has established clear "grounds for impeachment." Though not a member of the Squad, Rep. Sean Casten, D-Ill., also made an impeachment call Saturday. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., reiterated other Squad members' criticisms, adding Trump "reckless(ly) escalate(ed)" the conflict between Israel and Iran. "Congress must vote immediately on Rep. Thomas Massie and Sen. Tim Kaine's War Powers resolutions when we return to session." Omar also shared a quote from Bill Clinton, saying prior to the strike that Trump should "diffuse" the situation and that Netanyahu has "long wanted to fight Iran." Rep. Ayanna Pressley, the Boston lawmaker who also identifies with the Squad, said Trump violated the Constitution and risking innocent lives. In Pittsburgh, Rep. Summer Lee said Trump is "acting fully outside of his authority and is once again trampling on the Constitution." "This is an illegal and terrifying escalation. Dropping bombs on Iran brings us closer to war, not peace, and he is putting millions of lives at stake. Congress must immediately pass our War Powers Resolution to rein him in." Lee mocked Trump as "your hypocritical 'anti-war' president who just illegally struck Iran and is putting countless lives at risk." Later Saturday, Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., said the Squad and others crying out about the War Powers Act, saying that courts have ruled it refers to deploying troops, not what Trump has done. "If we are attacked, the commander-in-chief has the authority and ability to protect Americans at home and abroad if we feel threatened or attacked," Mullin said. "He's keeping America safe," he told "Hannity."
USA Today
26 minutes ago
- USA Today
US strikes on Iran could hit American economy at a fragile time
The U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend could ratchet up the pressure on an American economy that's turned increasingly fragile as a weekslong global trade war takes a toll. America's entry into what had been attacks between Israel and Iran is most likely to impact oil prices, investors said, which could ripple through the economy by causing higher transportation and gas prices, just as overall inflation throughout the economy has seemed to be contained. Energy analyst Rachel Ziemba told USA Today on June 22 oil prices may not trade much higher until and unless there's a sustained supply shock, like Iran deciding to block the crucial Strait of Hormuz. Iran's parliament on June 22 reportedly approved a measure endorsing exactly that, though whether it happens comes down to Iran's Supreme National Security Council. Ziemba calls that a 'low probability, high impact' risk – and one that commodities traders will likely struggle to price. That means energy prices may be volatile until conditions settle down – even as summer vacations start in earnest and a massive heat wave grips the central and eastern parts of the country. Any shock to financial markets and disruption of American consumers' expectations for the summer months comes as the overall economy is weakening quickly. "The world economy is not in a strong position to absorb another energy shock," warned Nigel Green, chief executive of deVere Group, a financial advisory firm. The U.S. joining the conflict between Israel and Iran raises the risks of a "sharp, global reaction," Green added. 'Investors are currently positioned for rate cuts, stable energy prices and an orderly global outlook," he said in a June 18 note. "A sudden and serious expansion of this conflict would force a violent repricing of risk across all major asset classes.' On June 18, the Labor Department reported that claims for unemployment insurance continued to rise. 'Uncertainty is leading companies to trim staff ahead of what could be a downturn in the economy. Batten down the hatches is what company executives are saying as the trade war and rumors of real war are starting to take a toll on the business outlook,' said Christopher Rupkey, chief economist with market research firm FWDBONDS LLC, in an email. Analysts at Oxford Economics take a more benign view. 'Rising Middle East tensions represent another adverse shock to an already weak economy,' they wrote on June 18. Their models suggest that oil prices at about $130 a barrel would pressure inflation to 6%. Post-pandemic inflation peaked at 9.1% in June 2022. That would put the Federal Reserve in a difficult position. The Fed raises interest rates to tame inflation, and cuts them to support borrowing and economic growth. So far this year, the central bank has held rates steady as it waits to see more information about how tariffs are playing out in the economy, but that may change. Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, speaking after the central bank held interest rates steady for the fourth consecutive meeting on June 18, told reporters the Fed is watching the situation in the Middle East, "like everybody else is." "What's tended to happen is when there's turmoil in the Middle East, you may see a spike in energy prices," Powell said prior to the U.S. strikes. "Those things don't generally tend to have lasting effects on inflation, although of course in the 1970s, they famously did, because you had a series of very, very large shocks. But, we haven't seen anything like that now." The U.S. economy is far less dependent on foreign oil than it was back in the 1970s, Powell added.
