Analysis: Tracking Trump's mixed messages on Iran
The United States is closer to a potential major military confrontation than we have ever have been in the Trump era. But discerning where President Donald Trump's head is at is proving a very difficult exercise.
Since Israel launched attacks on Iran on Friday, Trump has offered a series of mixed messages about what he wants from Iran and just how involved the United States is or will be.
This is a familiar story with Trump, who often vacillates between positions even in fraught circumstances. (In the last week alone, Trump reversed a policy on immigration raids targeting undocumented workers in the hospitality and farm industries, before reversing it again on Monday.) And there can be strategic value in being unpredictable.
But the ever-shifting commentary from the president also means even our adversaries and allies might not know precisely how to deal with and placate him. And Americans concerned about getting involved in another Middle Eastern war won't have a clear sense of whether that's about to happen.
Let's run through some of the big mixed messages.
Trump's big initiative with Iran has been trying to craft some kind of nuclear deal. Trump had pushed this for weeks – even suggesting at various points that such a deal was close – and kept talking about it even after Israel struck Iran last week.
But he's quickly seemed to move away from that emphasis.
On June 12, Trump said, 'We've had very good discussions with Iran.'
On June 15, Trump said Iran would 'like to make a deal. They're talking. They continue to talk.' He even said there was 'no deadline' on the talks.
On June 16, while at the G7 summit in Canada, Trump assured that Iran 'basically is at the negotiating table. They want to make a deal. And as soon as I leave here we're going to be doing something.'
But just a day after those comments and two days after saying there was no deadline, Trump quickly shifted. Early Tuesday morning, he suggested his appetite for negotiating has waned.
'They should have done the deal,' Trump said on Air Force One on his way back from Canada. 'I told them, 'Do the deal.' So I don't know. I'm not too much in the mood to negotiate.'
On June 15, Trump expressed optimism about peace.
'Likewise, we will have PEACE, soon, between Israel and Iran!' Trump posted on Truth Social. 'Many calls and meetings now taking place.'
By June 16, CNN reported Trump told his counterparts at the G7 meeting in Canada that ceasefire discussions were underway and that he wanted US officials to meet with their Iranian counterparts.
But by Tuesday morning, Trump suggested peace talks were not a priority.
'I have not reached out to Iran for 'Peace Talks' in any way, shape, or form,' he posted on Truth Social.
Trump also disputed France President Emmanuel Macron's comments that the US president was trying to negotiate a ceasefire.
'He has no idea why I am now on my way to Washington, but it certainly has nothing to do with a Cease Fire,' Trump posted.
By early Tuesday, Trump also suggested he wants a 'complete give-up' by Iran.
He said he wants 'an end, a real end, not a ceasefire. An end. Or giving up entirely. That's OK, too.'
Trump later Tuesday sent his clearest signal that his goals have moved away from any deals, posting two words on Truth Social in all caps: 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER.'
Trump has not only started downplaying the potential for a peace or a nuclear deal, but he also has increasingly flirted with the idea of more direct US involvement. CNN reported Tuesday afternoon that Trump is growing increasingly warm to using US military assets to strike Iranian nuclear facilities and is souring on a diplomatic solution to end the conflict.
Initially, Trump spoke mostly about US involvement if Iran struck American targets, but in recent days he's left open the possibility that it could be necessary to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and upped the saber-rattling.
On June 15, he said, 'It's possible we could get involved. But we are not at this moment involved.'
On June 16, he declined to address a possible US role in Israel's strikes, saying, 'I don't want to talk about that.'
By Tuesday, Trump suggested the US could get involved if that's what it took.
'Well I hope their program's going to be wiped out long before that,' Trump said when asked about a US military role. 'But they're not going to have a nuclear weapon.'
By late Tuesday morning, Vice President JD Vance proactively floated the possibility.
He said Trump had shown 'remarkable restraint' on using the US military to this point. But then he added: 'He may decide he needs to take further action to end Iranian enrichment. That decision ultimately belongs to the president.'
Trump soon ratcheted up his rhetoric even more, posting on Truth Social, 'We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran.' He added that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is an 'easy target,' and said, 'We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now.'
Depending upon your interpretation, the administration has either waffled or walked a very fine line on its role in the initial Israeli strikes against Iran.
On June 12, Trump cautioned Israel against the strikes.
'I don't want them going in because I think I would blow it,' Trump said, referring to US prospects of cutting a nuclear deal with Iran. The president added that it 'might help it actually, but it also could blow it.'
After Israel nonetheless struck Iran early June 13 local time, Secretary of State Marco Rubio sought to distance the administration from the strikes. 'Tonight, Israel took unilateral action against Iran. We are not involved in strikes against Iran,' Rubio said in a statement Thursday evening in the US.
Prev
Next
But later on Friday, Trump seemed to praise the strikes in comments to CNN's Dana Bash, calling it 'a very successful attack.'
Trump went to indicate he was well aware of Israel's plans, even citing in a Truth Social post 'the next already planned attacks,' which would be 'even more brutal.'
The administration's coordination with Israel became even clearer on June 15, when CNN reported that the two sides had discussed an Israeli plan to kill Khamenei, which Trump opposed and wasn't launched.
CNN also reported that the US has offered Israel defensive support in the case of Iranian retaliation.
The administration's line seems to be that because the US hasn't militarily participated in the strikes on Iran, it's not really involved. But Trump has been happy to play up US involvement when it serves his purposes.
His most recent social media posts, for instance, refer to 'we' in ways that suggest the United States and Israel are working together.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Melania shows President Trump the contempt he deserves. What's her secret?
I want to know: What is Melania Trump's secret? The first lady seems to be the only one who can do anything she wants regarding President Donald Trump and suffer no ill will from him. She comes and goes out of Trump's life on her own schedule most of the time – and she shows complete and total disdain for the president when she is with him. She attended the disaster of a military parade with Trump June 14 looking as bored as one could possibly look – and then skipped the G7 conference, leaving him wandering around looking like a lost puppy. Most spouses of other heads of state attended. Others who have embarrassed the president publicly this way have disappeared, never to be seen again. What power does she hold over him? If she could bottle it, she could make millions. Felton Marans, Lakewood Ranch This article originally appeared on Sarasota Herald-Tribune: Melania shows President Trump little respect. Good for her. | Letter
Bloomberg
35 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Why Recessions Aren't What They Used to Be
Subscribe to Merryn Talks Money on Apple Podcasts Subscribe to Merryn Talks Money on Spotify In a US economy based on intangibles and the seemingly constant stimulus of government spending, downturns are both less common and more shallow than they used to be. This according to Vincent Deluard, director of global macro strategy at StoneX, who joins this week's Merryn Talks Money to explain his thesis. If correct, it's one that has implications for the market. If a deep recession in the US isn't likely—and assuming that everyone understands that—it becomes hard to see market corrections being as brutal as they would have been in the past.
Bloomberg
41 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Traders Resist Defensive Stocks' Haven Status Amid Mideast Risk
US equities investors are reluctant to seek safety amid flaring geopolitical tensions, raising the risk of getting caught off guard if the conflict between Israel and Iran takes an unexpected turn in the days ahead. Normally, this level of anxiety would be enough to send money managers scurrying into stocks offering shelter, especially with President Donald Trump weighing whether to offer Israel military backing in its conflict with Iran. That step could roil crude prices and stoke worries about inflation, and potentially reignite a rush for investment havens.
