How Trump, a self-proclaimed 'peacemaker,' embraced Israel's campaign against Iran

Roughly one month ago, from the stage at an investment forum in Saudi Arabia, U.S. President Donald Trump issued a warning to Iran that would prove prophetic.
"We'll never allow America and its allies to be threatened with terrorism or nuclear attack," Trump told the crowd, sending a message to the leadership in Tehran.
"The time is right now for them to choose. Right now. We don't have a lot of time to wait. Things are happening at a very fast pace."
That May 13 ultimatum received little attention at the time.
But behind the scenes, the president already knew an attack on Iran could be imminent — and that there might be little he could do to stop it, according to two U.S. officials.
By mid-May, the Pentagon had begun drawing up detailed contingency plans to aid Israel if it followed through on its long-held ambition to strike Iran's nuclear program, the officials said. And the U.S. had already diverted thousands of defensive weapons away from war-torn Ukraine toward the Middle East in preparation for potential conflict, according to a Western source familiar with the matter and a Ukrainian source.
The Pentagon declined to comment for this story.
This account of the weeks and days leading up to Trump's decision to throw his support behind Israel's bombing campaign is based on interviews with over a dozen administration officials, foreign diplomats and Trump confidantes, most of whom spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations.
The picture that emerges is that of a long, secretive preparation process and a president who for weeks found himself torn between diplomacy and supporting military action — and was ultimately persuaded in part by an ally whose actions he did not fully control.
While Trump has long described himself as a peacemaker — dispatching Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff to the region several times to try to seal a diplomatic accord — he had several trusted political allies pushing him to back an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.
And U.S. intelligence had indicated a unilateral Israeli strike was possible, even likely, even if Trump wanted to wait, according to two U.S. officials.
Smoke rises following an Israeli attack in Tehran on Wednesday |
West Asia News Agency / via REUTERS
While it is unclear if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Trump's more hawkish allies ever got him to a "yes" to Israel's plans, by the days leading up the strike he was at least not a "no," according to two senior U.S. officials and a senior Israeli source.
That stance, people familiar with the dynamics said, helped tip Israel into action.
Seven days into the Israel-Iran conflict, Trump is left with a dilemma, said Aaron David Miller, a veteran diplomat who has advised six secretaries of state on Middle East policy.
He can try again to pursue a diplomatic resolution with Iran, allow Iran and Israel "to fight it out," or he can enter the war with U.S. airstrikes on the deeply buried Fordow enrichment plant, a step that would have unknown consequences for the region. Trump "let it (the Israeli attack) happen," said Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace policy institute. "He got on the tiger, and he's riding it."
The White House on Thursday said that Trump will make a decision on whether the U.S. will get involved in the conflict in the next two weeks.
The White House, the Israeli prime minister's office and Iran's delegation to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment. Tehran has consistently said its nuclear program is designed for peaceful purposes only, a conclusion Washington has rejected.
The coming storm
One of the first hints that Trump might sign off on an Israeli bombing campaign came in April.
During a closed-door meeting on April 17, Saudi Arabia's defense minister delivered a blunt message to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian: Take Trump's offer to negotiate an agreement seriously because it presents a way to avoid the risk of war with Israel.
Reuters could not determine whether the message was sent at Washington's behest, nor whether Iran's leaders took that message seriously.
With hindsight, they should have.
The Israel Defense Forces and the head of U.S. Central Command, General Michael "Erik" Kurilla, were discussing detailed intelligence about Iran's missile buildup and nuclear program and steps that could be required to defend U.S. troops and Israel, itself, in any conflict with Iran, according to a U.S. official and senior Israeli official.
Meanwhile, the U.S. was funneling weapons to Israel that would be useful for an air war with Iran. In one instance in early May, a large shipment of defensive missiles originally meant for Ukraine was diverted to Israel, instead, according to the Western source and the Ukrainian source.
Protesters rally during a "No War on Iran" demonstration in Los Angeles on Wednesday. |
AFP-Jiji
The diverted shipment caused consternation in Kyiv and sparked continued fears that additional weapons needed to defend against Moscow will, instead, be used to defend U.S. interests elsewhere, the Ukrainian source said.
In the opening months of Trump's term, Israel had already proposed to Washington a series of options to attack Iran's facilities, according to sources.
While Trump had rebuffed those ideas, saying he preferred diplomacy for the time being, several people close to him said he was never dead-set against using military force against Iran.
He had done so before. In 2020, despite a foreign policy during his first term that was otherwise marked by restraint, Trump ordered a drone strike that killed major general Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' division responsible for its international operations.
The Iranian government has since sought to murder Trump in revenge, U.S. prosecutors have said, an allegation Tehran denies.
Behind the scenes, Trump had been pulled in multiple directions on the Iran issue since before he even took office.
On one side, many supporters — including conservative media personality Tucker Carlson — and administration officials saw Trump's Make America Great Again movement as an antidote to decades of foreign wars that cost thousands of American lives without significantly advancing American interests.
On the other, several close Trump allies — from conservative commentator Mark Levin to Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham — were portraying a nuclear Iran as an existential threat that must be removed at any cost.
Trump, himself, took pride in being a broker of peace.
"My proudest legacy," he said during his inauguration address, "will be that of a peacemaker and unifier."
'It's a tango'
Ultimately, no U.S. official, Trump confidante or diplomat reporters talked to identified an epiphany that tipped the scales for the president.
One senior administration official said that after months of sitting on the fence a lack of diplomatic progress, a push from the Israelis and appeals by hawkish allies likely wore him down.
Trump aides and allies have noted that Israel's attack unfolded just after the expiry of a 60-day deadline the Trump administration had set for a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran.
The senior U.S. official said another dynamic was at play: As U.S. intelligence consistently showed Israel might go ahead with an attack with or without U.S. support, the administration could look caught off guard if they did not get behind it. Worse, it could appear that the U.S. was opposing a longtime ally.
Although Trump had appeared to some to snub Netanyahu as he pushed for a peaceful solution to the crisis, privately, Israel understood that Washington would stand by it, said a separate official.
By the time Trump talked to Netanyahu on June 9 — one of many phone calls in recent days — his stance was one of tacit, if not explicit approval, according to one U.S. and one Israeli official.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had said he would like more time to see diplomacy play out. But the U.S. official said that he did not explicitly veto Israel's plans.
By June 11, it was clear to Washington that Israel's plans were a go.
That day, Reuters reported that the U.S. was preparing a partial evacuation of its Iraqi embassy amid fears of reprisals from Iran following an imminent attack.
The next day, June 12, Washington sent a formal diplomatic note to several regional allies, warning them that an attack was imminent.
That evening, Israel launched its overnight barrage, an attack that almost immediately escalated into an air war.
Trump and some key cabinet members watched the events live from the wood-paneled "JFK room," part of the White House Situation Room. Other officials watched the events nearby.
On the menu, per one official: stone crabs from a local restaurant.
The initial attack appeared to be a success, with several close advisers to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei killed and key nuclear sites seriously damaged. Over the weekend, the Israelis considered killing Khamenei, himself, but were waved off by Trump, according to two U.S. officials.
Almost immediately, a political civil war erupted in Trump's Republican Party, with several high-profile conservatives, including members of Congress, accusing his administration of fanning the flames of war.
Seven days on, the U.S. intelligence community believes the strikes have set Iran's nuclear ambitions back by only months, according to a source familiar with U.S. intelligence reports, confirming a CNN report.
A significant blow to Iran's nuclear ambitions, most analysts say, will require dropping bunker-busting bombs on the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, the crown jewel of Iran's nuclear program. Only the U.S. has that capability.
Trump has said he is considering such a strike, which would represent a major escalation for the United States.
As of Thursday, his intentions were still unclear.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Japan Times

an hour ago

• Japan Times

Japan hopes good-faith negotiations will buy it some time in U.S. tariff talks

Negotiating in good faith in tariff talks with the United States could buy Japan some time and delay the implementation of much higher rates, chief tariff negotiator Ryosei Akazawa said. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that as long as countries are engaged in "sincere negotiations, there's room for extensions and other possibilities,' Akazawa told reporters after a ruling Liberal Democratic Party meeting Friday. 'We, for our part, are negotiating in good faith. So we understand that things will likely proceed on that basis,' he added. Japan is subject to 25% tariffs on cars and car parts, 50% on steel and aluminum as well as a 10% baseline tariff that could rise back to 24% if no deal is struck by July 9 — the day when a 90-day grace period expires. Akazawa said at a news conference earlier in the day that while Japan sees July 9 as a critical juncture, it does not view the date as a hard deadline between the two countries. 'As the prime minister has said, there are numerous national interests — starting with the automotive sector — that Japan must protect,' Akazawa said. 'For each of these interests, we intend to negotiate in a way that ensures they are not compromised, and aim to reach agreements that will benefit both countries.' His remarks came after Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and U.S. President Donald Trump failed to reach an agreement on tariffs or a breakthrough of any kind when they met Monday in Canada, despite repeated suggestions of progress in recent talks over the past few weeks. 'We have been exploring the possibility of reaching an agreement until the very last moment. However, there are still points where our perceptions do not align, and therefore, we have not yet reached a comprehensive agreement as a whole,' Ishiba said after the meeting. Akazawa has so far made six trips to Washington since tariff negotiations started in April, four of them in as many weeks in the run-up to the Trump-Ishiba meeting during the Group of Seven gathering earlier this week. Akazawa said he has built a good rapport with his American counterparts, including Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, which he said could be a positive factor. 'Of course, each of us is responsible for protecting our respective national interests, so even if there's trust or friendliness, negotiations don't come together easily,' he said in reply to a question from The Japan Times. 'That said, as people engage in discussions, mutual understanding of each other's character and personality deepens, and being able to negotiate with someone you regard as trustworthy — I believe that's a very positive thing.' Akazawa also noted Nippon Steel's successful acquisition of U.S. Steel after an 18-month uphill battle, saying the deal carries enormous significance and is a job well done. 'Speaking as a fellow negotiator engaged in similar talks — I truly want to say, job well done. Reaching an agreement undoubtedly involved tremendous effort, and I sincerely respect that,' he said. 'I believe this is a highly meaningful and significant agreement, not only for the economic relationship but also for the future development of Japan-U.S. ties as a whole.'

Japan Times

2 hours ago

• Japan Times

Japan's economy is particularly vulnerable amid Middle East conflict

Japan is heavily exposed to turmoil in the Middle East despite being far away and removed from the hostilities, and the crisis is coming at a time when Japan is vulnerable and in no position to absorb shocks that emanate from the conflict. According to the Petroleum Association of Japan, about three-quarters of the country's crude oil imports are shipped via the Strait of Hormuz, a choke point between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman with Iran on one shore. Iran, which is currently in a military conflict with Israel, has threatened to close the strategic passage. 'A large portion of crude oil and gas is transported through this strait, so any disruption would hinder energy procurement and cause prices to increase sharply," said Yuki Togano, a researcher at the Japan Research Institute. The price of oil is already up about 10% since the conflict began on June 13 — when Israel started destroying Iran's nuclear capabilities — with Brent crude oil futures now trading at about $77 a barrel. Tagano said that if the Strait of Hormuz is closed, the price could jump to $140 a barrel. Takahide Kiuchi, executive economist at Nomura Research Institute, wrote in a recent report that the price of crude could climb to around $120 a barrel. "This time, Iran's regime might possibly collapse. Blocking the Strait of Hormuz might anger China and Middle Eastern nations, but when facing a situation where the regime itself could collapse, it's natural to put every possible measure on the table,' Togano said. According to a report by Zero Carbon Analytics, a research group, Japan is the most vulnerable of the large Asian economies to the disruption of petroleum shipments through the Strait of Hormuz due to its high reliance on Middle East oil. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said on Thursday that the government will implement additional measures from June 26 to prevent gasoline prices from rising above about ¥175 per liter. The average price on Monday was ¥171.2 per liter. Togano said that although measures to contain price increases are important, Japan needs to strengthen policies, including those related to saving energy, to contain fundamental risks arising from reliance on oil imports from the Middle East. Japan is already facing a number of significant economic challenges. The trade war with the United States is affecting exports and threatening auto sales, which are important to the Japanese economy. Inflation is also a problem. It is high and squeezing households, which are struggling to make ends meet as wages fail to keep up with price increases. Rising food prices are particularly worrying. Japan's inflation in May was 3.5%, with the price of rice having more than doubled. If the Middle East conflict continues to push up oil prices, the yen is expected to decline as dollar-buying must increase to pay for energy imports. Even though the yen is traditionally seen as a safe-haven asset, the dollar seems to be attracting higher demand for those seeking a refuge from turmoil, Tsuyoshi Ueno, an economist at NLI Research Institute, wrote in a report on Thursday. On Friday, the yen traded at ¥145.3 to the dollar, from about ¥143.5 when the conflict began. Ueno points out that the yen weakened significantly after Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 and oil prices increased. 'If the heightened tensions in the Middle East continue for a long time and oil prices rise and remain high, it will likely become a major factor for the yen's depreciation.'

Kyodo News

3 hours ago

• Kyodo News

FEATURE: Matcha's moment in peril as Trump tariff threat looms over industry

By Toma Mochizuki, Spotlight Japan - 12 minutes ago - 16:17 | All, Spotlight The Kokaen tea farm in western Japan's Aichi Prefecture is among many in the matcha industry that has benefited from the recent boom in popularity of the Japanese powdered tea. While a surge in demand has been welcomed in a country where domestic tea consumption has been declining, there are concerns that U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff regime may push up prices and dampen sales. The uncertainty has left both experts and tea farmers anxious, fearing that a shrinking global market could mean the loss of a promising and lucrative opportunity. >>Read the full article with visuals and video on Spotlight Japan>> More Spotlight Japan stories: Remote Japan island, population 11, aims to become global manga hub Award-winning short captures rawness of relationships in 14 minutes FEATURE: Silent witnesses: A-bomb trees carrying on aging survivors' legacy