Two weeks' notice: Trump's deadline on Iran is a familiar one

President Donald Trump's two-week timeline to decide on whether the U.S. will strike Iran's nuclear sites is a familiar one — it's one he's repeatedly used since his first term in office.
'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' he said in a statement issued through White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.
In the last two months, Trump has promised action on questions or decisions in 'two weeks' over a dozen times — and he used the same timeline repeatedly during his first term in office.
'We're going to be announcing something, I would say over the next two or three weeks, that will be phenomenal in terms of tax and developing our aviation infrastructure,' Trump said of tax overhaul plans on Feb. 9, 2017.
He released a one-page outline of the plan 11 weeks later, according to a Bloomberg review that year.
He went on to repeatedly cite the time frame for impending actions on health care and infrastructure that never materialized during his first four years in office.
Trump's use of the timing prediction has accelerated in recent weeks — and he's used it on items ranging from trade deals and tariffs to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Much of what he's predicted hasn't come to pass, with questions he's said he'd answer remaining unanswered.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Two weeks to set rates on tariffs
Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on April 23, Trump said the country was going to have "great deals" on trade.
"And by the way, if we don't have a deal with a company or a country, we're going to set the tariff. We just set the tariff. It's something that we think — that will happen, I say, over the next couple of weeks, wouldn't you say? I think so," Trump said. "Over the next two, three weeks. We'll be setting the number. And we're going to pick — could be for China too."
Two weeks to decide on continued aid for Ukraine
During an April 24 Oval Office meeting with Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Trump was asked if he'd continued providing military intelligence and aid to Ukraine if there was no peace deal with Russia.
"Let's see what happens. I think we're going to make a deal, and if we make a deal, it'll be wonderful. We won't have to worry about your question. You can ask that question in two weeks, and we'll see. But I think we're getting very close," Trump said.
Two weeks to find out if Trump trusts Putin
Asked by reporters on April 27 if he trusted Russian President Vladimir Putin, given the ramped-up attacks on Ukraine while Trump was calling for a ceasefire, the president said, 'We'll let you know in about two weeks.'
Two weeks to determine Putin's path in Ukraine
In an interview that aired May 4 on NBC's " Meet the Press," Trump was asked by moderator Kristen Welker if he'd misread Putin's position on Russia's war with Ukraine.
"No, I'll tell you about in a month from now, or two weeks from now. I have no idea. I can tell you this, he's ... his ambition was stopped to a large extent when he saw that it was me that was now leading the charge," Trump said.
Two weeks to set a trade deal with China
Trump told reporters on May 4 on Air Force One that he'd be "setting" a trade deal with China.
"At some point in the next two weeks or three weeks, I'm gonna be setting the deal. I'm gonna say that such and such a country has had a tremendous trade surplus, surplus their way, with us. They've taken advantage of us in various ways," Trump said.
Two weeks to announce tariffs on pharmaceutical companies
Asked on May 5 in the Oval Office if he'd made any determination on tariff rates and timing for pharmaceutical companies, Trump said, "I have. I'll announce it over the next two weeks."
Asked about those same tariffs on Tuesday, Trump said, "We're going to be doing pharmaceuticals very soon."
Two weeks to sign trade deals
During a May 6 meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in the Oval Office, Trump suggested a number of trade deals were imminent.
"We also have a situation, because everyone says, when, when? When are you going to sign deals? We don't have to sign deals. We could sign 25 deals right now, Howard [Lutnick, the commerce secretary], if we wanted. We don't have to sign deals. They have to sign deals with us. They want a piece of our market. We don't want a piece of their market," Trump said. "So we can just sit down, and I'll do this at some point over the next two weeks."
Two weeks to meet Putin and end the war
Trump was asked in Abu Dhabi on May 16 when he would meet with Putin to discuss ending the war. "As soon as we can set it up," Trump replied. "And I think in, uh, two or three weeks we could have it be a much, much safer place."
Two weeks to set trade terms
At a May 16 business roundtable in Abu Dhabi, Trump said he'd soon be setting the terms of the trade deals he wanted, and that Lutnick and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent would be notifying trading partners.
"So at a certain point over the next two to three weeks, I think Scott and Howard will be sending letters out, essentially telling people it won't be very fair. But we'll be telling people what they'll be paying to do business in the United States. They'll essentially be paying to be doing business in the United States," the president said.
Two weeks to determine if Zelenskyy is doing a good job
Asked on May 19 in the Oval Office if Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was doing enough to help end the war, Trump said, "I'd rather tell you in about two weeks from now because I can't say yes or no.
"I think — look, he's a strong person, Zelenskyy, a strong guy and he's not the easiest person to deal with, but I think that he wants to stop. It's a very bad — it's a very bad thing that's happening over there. I think he wants to stop, but I could answer that question better in two weeks or four weeks from now."
Two weeks to determine if Putin wants to end the war
Trump was asked again if he believed Putin wanted to end the war while taking questions from reporters in the Oval Office on May 28.
"I can't tell you that, but I'll let you know in about two weeks, within two weeks. We're going to find out very soon. We're going to find out whether or not he's tapping us along or not. And if he is, we'll respond a little bit differently. But it will take about a week and a half, two weeks," Trump said.
Two weeks to send out trade deal offers
After touting a preliminary trade deal with China, Trump was asked at the Kennedy Center which country he expected to sign a deal with next.
"Well, we're dealing with Japan. We're dealing with South Korea. We're dealing with a lot of them. We're dealing with about 15 countries. But as you know, we have about 150 plus and you can't do that. So we're going to be sending letters out in about a week and a half, two weeks, to countries and telling them what the deal is, like I did with E.U.," Trump responded.
Two weeks to decide whether to attack Iran
Press secretary Karoline Leavitt began her briefing on Thursday by discussing potential U.S. involvement in Israel's conflict with Iran.
"Regarding the ongoing situation in Iran, I know there has been a lot of speculation amongst all of you in the media regarding the president's decision-making and whether or not the United States will be directly involved," she said. "In light of that news, I have a message directly from the president, and I quote, 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.' That's a quote directly from the president for all of you today."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

NBC News

24 minutes ago

• NBC News

Pakistan to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize

Pakistan said on Saturday it would recommend U.S. President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, an accolade that he has said he craves, for his work in helping to resolve the recent conflict between India and Pakistan. Some analysts in Pakistan said the move might persuade Trump to think again about potentially joining Israel in striking Iran's nuclear facilities. Pakistan has condemned Israel's action as a violation of international law and a threat to regional stability. In May, a surprise announcement by Trump of a ceasefire brought an abrupt end to a four-day conflict between nuclear-armed foes India and Pakistan. Trump has since repeatedly said that he averted a nuclear war, saved millions of lives, and grumbled that he got no credit for it. Pakistan agrees that U.S. diplomatic intervention ended the fighting, but India says it was a bilateral agreement between the two militaries. 'President Trump demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship through robust diplomatic engagement with both Islamabad and New Delhi, which de-escalated a rapidly deteriorating situation,' Pakistan said. 'This intervention stands as a testament to his role as a genuine peacemaker.' Governments can nominate people for the Nobel Peace Prize. There was no immediate response from Washington. A spokesperson for the Indian government did not respond to a request for comment. Trump has repeatedly said that he's willing to mediate between India and Pakistan over the disputed Kashmir region, their main source of enmity. Islamabad, which has long called for international attention to Kashmir, is delighted. But his stance has upended U.S. policy in South Asia, which had favored India as a counterweight to China, and put in question previously close relations between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In a social media post, opens new tab on Friday, Trump gave a long list of conflicts he said he had resolved, including India and Pakistan and the Abraham accords in his first term between Israel and some Muslim-majority countries. He added: 'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do.' Pakistan's move to nominate Trump came in the same week its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, met the U.S. leader for lunch. It was the first time that a Pakistani military leader had been invited to the White House when a civilian government was in place in Islamabad. Trump's planned meeting with Modi at the G7 summit in Canada last week did not take place after the U.S. president left early, but the two later spoke by phone, in which Modi said 'India does not and will never accept mediation' in its dispute with Pakistan, according to the Indian government. Mushahid Hussain, a former chair of the Senate Defence Committee in Pakistan's parliament, suggested nominating Trump for the peace prize was justified.' Trump is good for Pakistan,' he said. 'If this panders to Trump's ego, so be it. All the European leaders have been sucking up to him big time.' But the move was not universally applauded in Pakistan, where Trump's support for Israel's war in Gaza has inflamed passions. 'Israel's sugar daddy in Gaza and cheerleader of its attacks on Iran isn't a candidate for any prize,' said Talat Hussain, a prominent Pakistani television political talk show host, in a post on X. 'And what if he starts to kiss Modi on both cheeks again after a few months?'

Telegraph

43 minutes ago

• Telegraph

EU fantasies of toppling the dollar are totally delusional

It's a nice problem to have amid the Trump-inspired madness that grips today's foreign exchange markets. But it's a problem none the less. The Swiss franc keeps on appreciating, and there seems to be almost nothing the authorities can do to stop it. Increasingly alarmed by its trajectory, the Swiss National Bank last week cut its official policy rate back down to zero, and there is now talk of rates going negative again by summer's end. But to little effect. Switzerland's safe haven attributes have rarely been in such high demand. Rising geopolitical tensions have combined with growing loss of trust in the dollar as the bedrock of the global economy to send the franc soaring, almost regardless of whatever rate of interest it carries. Lest it be gold, there are few repositories of wealth thought more secure than Switzerland. Contrast that with the UK, where Bank Rate is still firmly stuck at 4.25pc with stubbornly persistent inflation to match. Thanks substantially to the lower import prices that the surging franc brings about, prices as a whole are going down not up; there is little or no cost of living crisis. This is great for consumers, not so much for Swiss industry, which has to match these deflating prices at home and abroad. But thus far at least, it's coped remarkably well. I've never bought the idea that a competitive economy needs a weak currency. Persistent devaluation has been the British way for decades now, and little good has it done either. At best, it's only smoothed the decline – a tranquiliser to avoid having to face up to the hard yards of painful structural adjustment. While the UK has grown poorer, the Swiss grow ever richer – living proof that a strong currency goes hand in hand with a competitive economy. The one is a reflection of the other. Bad, uncompetitive companies are quickly weeded out and dispensed with, while the disciplines of having to compete with cheaper foreign goods and services forces the survivors into imaginative innovation and productivity gain. You can, however, have too much of a good thing, and this is the unfortunate position that Switzerland now finds itself in. Broadly speaking, Switzerland produces in appreciating francs, but sells in equally fast depreciating dollars. There is only so far countervailing productivity improvement can take you. Theoretically, Donald Trump's tariff policies should make the dollar stronger, in that all other things being equal, they ought to reduce the size of the deficit. But it hasn't worked out that way. In practice, they've only further undermined international confidence in US economic management more widely. To most observers, it looks as if the White House is deliberately trying to tank the dollar. And on one level, it is; a depreciating dollar temporarily helps domestic producers by making imports more expensive. When combined with tariffs – effectively a sales tax on foreign producers – US industry gets a double boost. Trump wants the best of both worlds; he wants a weak dollar, but he also very much likes the dollar's commanding position in the global economy for the geopolitical power it bestows. Sadly for him, it's not clear he can have both. To support a weak dollar, he needs to make dollar assets less attractive to foreign investors. As Stephen Miran, the head of Trump's council of economic advisers, has suggested, this might be achieved by imposing a withholding tax on income generated by US assets, or by converting foreign holdings of US Treasuries into 100-year bonds. Trump's problem is that the less attractive the US makes itself to foreign investors, the less likely it is that the dollar can sustain its dominant reserve currency position. Use of the dollar for sanctions against countries the US has got a problem with has further undermined trust in the currency as both a store of value and reliable means of exchange. International trust relies crucially on the idea of a global order based on agreed rules, the very thing Trump wants to dispense with. So the dollar turns weaker, and together with the Trump tariff shock, it drives up domestic US inflation. Despite almost daily berating from Trump, Jerome Powell, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, is sitting on his hands and refusing to reduce interest rates in the precipitous way the president demands. The more Trump complains, the more Powell digs in. Determination not to give way has become a matter of principle, almost regardless of its economic merits. Powell's stance is totemic in the wider struggle to protect institutional integrity from presidential diktat. Once Federal Reserve independence goes, the whole fragile structure of dollar hegemony begins to crumble. Even Trump must know that. Meanwhile, Europe is cutting fast – with the notable exception of the UK, where inflation remains a problem. Normally, America's higher interest rates relative to Europe would cause the dollar to strengthen, but the trust issue has provoked a very different response – a weaker dollar despite a widening interest rate gap. Christine Lagarde, the president of the European Central Bank, sees Trump's antics as an opportunity for a 'global euro moment'. It has long been the ambition of European policymakers to look the mighty dollar in the face, and eventually usurp its position in the international monetary system. This has always seemed fanciful. For all its grandstanding, the EU remains a disjointed confederation of fiscally sovereign and often deeply divided nations, with no centralised Treasury function to speak of, no banking union and no unified sovereign debt market. This makes its monetary union acutely vulnerable to existential crisis. Lagarde might think of herself as queen bee, but her powers and reach are remarkably limited. As long as this remains the case – and there is little sign of it changing – Lagarde's musings are just delusional nonsense. Where reserve managers have been diversifying away from the dollar, it has, moreover, tended to be into gold, not the euro. Indeed, gold recently overtook the euro as the biggest central bank reserve asset after the dollar. A rather more potent long term threat comes from China, whose central bank digital currency and the infrastructure being built around it are deliberately designed to provide an alternative to the dollar for trade and investment. Those who take umbrage at Trump's America can try China instead. Who's to say it's less reliable than a country that slaps record tariffs on some of its closest allies? Regrettably, Switzerland is just too small to act as a global reserve currency. As it is, it struggles to manage the inflows of international capital looking for safety amid the bedlam of today's world. Already, the Swiss National Bank balance sheet is swollen by its various currency interventions to a size considerably bigger than that of Switzerland's entire economy. It can surely go no further in printing Swiss francs to buy foreign assets. But as I say, it's a nice problem to have.

Reuters

an hour ago

• Reuters

The future of Iran

Follow on Apple or Spotify. Listen on the Reuters app. For decades, Iran was able to project power across the Middle East using its network of proxies. That meant any strikes against it could threaten to trigger a formidable response. But Israel's recent attacks have exposed just how vulnerable Tehran is. In this special episode of Reuters World News, we look at how Iran went from monarchy to Islamic Republic - and what its future could look like. Sign up for the Reuters Econ World newsletter here. Listen to the Reuters Econ World podcast here. Visit the Thomson Reuters Privacy Statement for information on our privacy and data protection practices. You may also visit to opt out of targeted advertising. Further Reading Iran's divided opposition senses its moment but activists remain wary of protests, opens new tab Iran strikes Israeli hospital; Trump to decide on US role in conflict within 'two weeks', opens new tab Israeli scientists scramble to save work after Iranian missile hits labs, opens new tab