Trump Campaigned on Staying Out of Wars. Now He's Changing His Tune on Iran
When President Donald Trump ducked out early from a meeting with G-7 nations in the Canadian mountain resort of Kananaskis on June 16, he said he needed to get back to Washington as strikes escalated between Israel and Iran. He didn't like relying on phone calls, he told reporters on Air Force One, and he wanted to be a 'little bit, I think, more well versed.' For the normally freewheeling Trump, it was a sign of the gravity of the moment, a rare acknowledgement that he didn't have enough information to handle a hair-trigger situation.
The stakes for America are high. Backed into a corner by Israel's surprisingly effective attack, Tehran could decide to turn its proxy terrorist forces against the U.S. in the region and beyond. The strategic rapprochement between Israel and Arab states hangs in the balance as conflict threatens to spread. More broadly, the outcome of the war could decide whether the U.S. commits another generation of troops to the Middle East, once again diverting American might from countering China's expansion in the Pacific.
At the same time, an Israeli defeat of Iran could open a new era of Arab-Israeli cooperation, defang Tehran's regional militias, and deliver a blow to China, which had sought to bolster Tehran as a regional counterweight to the U.S. 'You've got this axis with Beijing at the core,' argues Matthew Pottinger, former Deputy National Security Adviser during Trump's first term.
The U.S. could tip the balance either way, but Trump is constrained in how he manages the conflict. It's been four years since the disastrous U.S. pullout from Afghanistan. Trump campaigned on not getting the U.S. into more wars, and some of the fiercest opposition to further entanglement is coming from his own MAGA base.
Trump has already beefed up the U.S. military presence around Israel and Iran, ordering another guided-missile destroyer to the waters off Israel and directing the U.S.S. Nimitz aircraft carrier and its strike group to change course in the Pacific and motor toward the Arabian Sea.
Iran sits at one of the world's most important strategic crossroads. Nearly one-third of the world's crude-oil production passes through the Strait of Hormuz—and within 30 miles of Iran's coastline. Tanker ships have been warned to sail closer to the coast of Oman, on the western side of the strait. Amid the massive military mobilization, maritime alerts are warning shipping vessels that 'electronic interference' could jam their navigation equipment.
For Trump, a direct Iranian attack on the U.S. would trigger a military response. Iran ordered an assassination attempt against Trump and tried to kill an Iranian-American journalist living in Brooklyn. 'The fact that they have been open in these threats tells me they don't believe they are facing credible retaliatory risk from the United States,' Pottinger says. 'The Israeli strikes might inject some reality into their calculus. But Iranians have been known to miscalculate on many occasions.'
After his return to Washington, Trump issued noticeably more hostile rhetoric. He called for Iran's 'unconditional surrender' and chastised its leaders for not taking talks more seriously. 'Why didn't you negotiate with me two weeks ago? You could have done fine. You would have had a country,' he said. Now all bets are off for Iran, and the U.S.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
JD Vance wades into the immigration thicket: From the Politics Desk
Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. Happy first day of summer! In today's edition, Jonathan Allen explores the challenges awaiting Vice President JD Vance as he lands in Los Angeles. Plus, we dive into President Donald Trump's penchant for a giving a two-week timetable on big issues. And Dylan Ebs answers this week's reader question on ranked choice voting. Sign up to receive this newsletter in your inbox every weekday here. — Adam Wollner Vice President JD Vance is wading into the immigration thicket today by traveling to Los Angeles, where Marines and National Guard forces have been deployed to provide backup for federal agents executing raids. For Vance, it's tricky territory because President Donald Trump keeps changing his mind — or at least his rhetoric — on immigration enforcement. On one hand, Trump is anxious to fulfill a campaign promise to deport millions of undocumented immigrants. The MAGA base demands it. And Vance, who hopes to inherit the MAGA base, seldom strays far from its orthodoxy. But on the other hand, Trump has wavered on parts of his own mass deportation plan. After Trump said that workers in certain sectors — farming, hotels and restaurants — would not be targeted in raids, he quickly reversed that policy. Vance finds himself taking on a more visible role just as the MAGA movement is feeling the strain of a president torn between ideology and popularity. It's nothing new for a vice president to land in the middle of a vexing issue. Kamala Harris had the border portfolio in Joe Biden's administration. If Trump's immigration policies end up being a success, Vance will no doubt profit from it. But if they don't, he may suffer. Read more: Appeals court says Trump can keep control of California National Guard troops, by Dennis Romero President Donald Trump's two-week timeline to decide on whether the U.S. will strike Iran's nuclear sites is a familiar one. '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. Since the beginning of May, Trump has promised action on questions or decisions in 'two weeks' around 10 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. Read more on Trump's frequent two-week timeline → Catch up on our latest reporting on the Israel-Iran conflict: Trump is relying on a small circle of advisers as he weighs Iran strikes, by Courtney Kube, Carol E. Lee, Garrett Haake and Dan De Luce What could happen if Trump does decide to bomb Iran's main nuclear site, by Alexander Smith Iran not sure it can trust America after Israeli attack, Iran's foreign minister tells NBC News, by Dan De Luce 'She's wrong': Trump breaks with Gabbard on Iran assessment, by Vaughn Hillyard Follow live updates → Thanks to everyone who emailed us! This week's question comes from Thomas Gysegem: 'Will there be ranked voting in the New York City mayoral primary? Please explain how ranked voting works.' To answer that, we turned to our intern, Dylan Ebs, who just put together a helpful explainer on the process. Ranked choice voting, which New York is utilizing for next week's mayoral primary election, is a system that lets voters rank candidates in order of preference rather than pick just one. The number of candidates voters can rank depends on the specific rules in an area. In New York City, voters can rank up to five in one race. Voters don't have to fill their ballots, though. A voter whose heart is set on only one candidate can pick just one. But if that candidate doesn't get the most votes, that voter won't have a say in later rounds of counting. After the votes are tabulated, the last-place candidate is eliminated. Ballots from voters who supported that candidate then have the next choice counted. If no candidate has hit 50%, then counting continues, eliminating another last-place candidate and counting the next-ranked choices on all those ballots in the next round. The process continues until a candidate reaches majority support and wins. ⚖️ In the courts: A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to release pro-Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil from immigration custody. Read more → ⚖️ In the courts, cont.: A federal judge in Massachusetts again blocked the government's attempt to revoke Harvard's ability to enroll international students. Read more → ⚖️ SCOTUS watch: The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that victims of terrorism can sue Palestinian entities in U.S. courts. Read more → ⚖️ SCOTUS watch, cont.: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticized her colleagues in a scathing dissent in a case involving vehicle emissions regulations. Read more → 🚗 Road rage arrest: An Ohio man who allegedly ran GOP Rep. Max Miller off the road while waving a Palestinian flag and hurling antisemitic threats has been arrested. Read more → 🗽 Big Apple showdown: Progressive candidates in New York City's mayoral election are banding together in an effort to stop former Gov. Andrew Cuomo's comeback tour. Read more → ➡️ Split screen: Trump did not formally mark Juneteenth yesterday and said the U.S. has 'too many non-working holidays,' while his predecessor, Joe Biden, celebrated the occasion at a Black church in Texas. Read more → 🗳️ Running it back: Trump called for a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election, which he lost to Biden more than four years ago. Read more → That's all From the Politics Desk for now. Today's newsletter was compiled by Adam Wollner and Dylan Ebs. If you have feedback — likes or dislikes — email us at politicsnewsletter@ And if you're a fan, please share with everyone and anyone. They can sign up here. This article was originally published on
New York Post
36 minutes ago
- New York Post
What will it take for Gavin Newsom to focus on his day job?
President Donald Trump rightly took the ruling upholding his National Guard deployment to Los Angeles as a 'BIG WIN,' but it can be a winner for Californians, too — if it inspires their governor to focus on the job they elected him to. Gov. Gavin Newsom vows to litigate on, but if necessary the Supreme Court will slap him down, too. What will get him to quit his near-nonstop posturing to set himself up for a 2028 presidential run, and get his nose to the gubernatorial grindstone? It's bad enough that he sided with LA Mayor Karen Bass in obstructing ICE efforts to deport child predators, murderers and other worst-of-the-worst 'asylum seekers' — posturing that all but invited the riots that Trump deployed the Guard to shut down. Worse that this rush to the left came after Newsom's fake to the right with a series of podcasts where he pretended sympathy to centrist criticisms of the far-left agenda. That follows his haplessness during the Los Angeles fires — a disaster Trump credibly tied to Newsom's green obsessions. Other Gavin grotesquerie included rushing to meet the president on Trump's LA visit bare weeks after prepping for all-out legal #resistance to the new prez. California is plagued with soaring homelessness, elevated crime rates and brutally high costs of living: Even its welcome to illegal immigrants hasn't prevented a historic switch from growth to decline. That is: On Newsom's watch, Cali is for the first time ever losing seats in the House of Representatives because so many residents are fleeing to less-toxic jurisdictions. The Golden State is a natural near-paradise, but Newsom & co. are destroying it. That governor is still devoting his time and energy to a years-off national run is damning proof that he doesn't care a whit for the people of California.
New York Times
40 minutes ago
- New York Times
Where the Legal Fight Over the California National Guard Stands
President Trump's decision this month to send National Guard troops to Los Angeles against the wishes of Gov. Gavin Newsom has sparked a legal battle that could reshape how much latitude a president has to deploy the military on U.S. soil. On June 10, days after Mr. Trump federalized the California National Guard in response to protests over immigration raids, the state filed a lawsuit calling the move illegal. Even as the Trump administration added active-duty Marines to the mix, a judge ordered it to return the National Guard to the control of Mr. Newsom. But an appeals court blocked that move, and Mr. Trump maintains authority over those troops today. Mr. Trump's decision to deploy troops came after Immigration and Customs Enforcement started carrying out raids at workplaces in the city, sweeping up hundreds of migrants for potential deportation and drawing protesters. While the majority protested peacefully, a subset committed violent acts like throwing objects and burning vehicles. Here's where things stand in the case. What made Trump's decision to deploy troops significant? Normally, governors control their state's National Guard and dispatch such troops themselves when there is a need to quell civil disorder or fight a natural disaster. On rare occasions, the president may take control of a guard or otherwise deploy troops under federal control on domestic soil, but in recent decades that has happened only at a governor's request. Mr. Trump's move was the first time in more than six decades that a president had taken control of a state guard over a governor's objections, raising profound questions about presidential power, state sovereignty and civil liberties. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
