Trump's ‘made-for-TV' security chiefs iced out from Iran inner circle
Donald Trump didn't even bother to conceal his contempt of Tulsi Gabbard's assessment of Iran's nuclear ambitions.
'She's wrong,' the US president said on Friday, speaking to media en route to his Bedminster golf course in New Jersey.
Mr Trump has assembled an unusual team for his White House and Cabinet, drawing on close loyalists, Fox News presenters and veterans of Capitol Hill.
But with tensions boiling over in the Middle East he has made the unusual move of sidelining two key national security figures, relying instead on old friends and military insiders.
It means Ms Gabbard, the national intelligence director, and Pete Hegseth, the US defence secretary, both surprise picks who had impressed Mr Trump with lively performances on Fox News – have found themselves on the outside of discussions.
Instead, he has turned to JD Vance, the vice-president, Marco Rubio, and Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, John Ratcliffe, the CIA director, and Steve Witkoff, the Middle East envoy.
Mr Hegseth, who was confirmed to the Cabinet by a single vote in the Senate, has seen his stock with Mr Trump fall in recent months.
The 45-year-old accidentally leaked US military plans to bomb Yemen's Houthi rebels after a journalist was added to a group chat on Signal, the messaging app.
In the wake of 'Signalgate', he sacked three close advisers over a Pentagon leak investigation, and his chief of staff resigned shortly afterwards. Mr Trump was also rumoured to have scolded his defence secretary after being underwhelmed by his military birthday parade.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Iran's proxy militias may be unable to help if Tehran opts to hit back at US
Iran's proxy militias across the Middle East have yet to retaliate for the overnight strikes against the Islamic Republic and are sending mixed signals about their willingness to strike US targets – or even Israel – in coming days. The apparent reluctance or inability of such groups to come to Iran's aid will limit Tehran's options if decision-makers there opt to escalate the conflict with the US. Iran's Revolutionary Guards warned the US on Sunday in a statement carried by state TV to 'expect regrettable responses' to its strikes on the country's nuclear sites. Iran, it said, would 'use options beyond the understanding … of the aggressor front' and would continue to target Israel, which has been hit by multiple waves of missile and drone attacks since it struck Iran on 13 June. On Friday, a new wave of Iranian missiles launched in a first response to the US strikes hit sites in central Israel, injuring at least 10 people, according to Israeli rescue services. The strongest statement in support of Tehran from the militant groups that make up its coalition of proxies across the Middle East – the so-called 'axis of resistance' – has come from the political bureau of the Houthi movement in Yemen. The Iran-backed group called on Muslim nations to join 'the jihad and resistance option as one front against the Zionist-American arrogance', saying it was ready to target US ships and warships in the Red Sea. The Houthis have already fought American forces in recent months, after the US president, Donald Trump, launched an air offensive against the group following months of attacks on shipping in the Red Sea and against Israel. A ceasefire was agreed in May. 'The Houthis still retain enough capability to do what they like doing. If they want to hit US vessels in the Red Sea, they still have that capability. They are a wild card and the Iranians don't spend a lot of time trying to restrain them,' said Michael Knights, an expert in Iranian proxies at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. There is, however, little evidence that Iran-aligned and supported groups in Iraq, which have struck US targets in the past, were planning imminent action. Such groups could do considerable damage to US bases in Iraq, Syria, Kuwait and Jordan if mobilised, and have been attacked by the US in the past but are likely to be deterred by the potential high cost of launching new strikes against US. 'They could do some damage but the US understand these targets and would find them pretty fast,' said Knights. One Tehran-backed Shia militia in Iraq, Kata'ib Hezbollah, has threatened to attack 'US interests' in the Middle East in response to Washington's participation in Israel's support. One of its commanders, Abu Ali al-Askari, was quoted on CNN as saying that US bases in the region 'will become akin to duck-hunting grounds'. However, the group suffered heavy losses in US airstrikes after killing three US soldiers at a base in Jordan last year and may not follow through on its rhetoric. Hezbollah, the powerful Islamist militant militia based in Lebanon that has long been supported by Tehran, has made no official statement, with its officials briefing journalists in the region that it would stay out of any new clash between Iran and the US. Hezbollah, the keystone of Iran's axis of resistance, was very significantly weakened by Israel's air offensive and ground invasion of Lebanon last year. Its entire leadership was killed and stocks of missiles, intended to deter Israel from attacking Iran's nuclear programme, destroyed. Hamas, another member of the coalition of militant groups built up by Tehran over recent decades, is in no position to threaten the US or Israel currently, analysts said. Links between the proxies and Tehran have been further weakened in the last week after assassinations conducted by Israel. Several senior officials in the Revolutionary Guards killed in airstrikes were involved in running the coalition of militant groups, including Behnam Shahriyari, who Israeli military officials said was in charge of equipping proxy forces with weapons including ballistic missiles. Shahriyari was killed while driving in western Iran on Friday, Israel's military said. The US has about 20 bases in the Middle East and tens of thousands of troops. It also has an extensive diplomatic presence, that could potentially be targeted. The US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, said military generals have elevated protection measures across the region, especially in Iraq, Syria, and the Gulf. 'Our forces remain on high alert and are fully postured to respond to any Iranian retaliation or proxy attacks, which would be an incredibly poor choice,' Hegseth told reporters at a press conference on Sunday. Underlining the threat, a Middle East-based maritime centre overseen by the US. military warned on Sunday that there was a 'high' risk to US-associated ships after the American strikes. 'The threat to US-associated commercial shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden is currently assessed as HIGH,' the Joint Maritime Information Center wrote in an advisory to shippers. Other means of retaliation available to Tehran may take longer to mobilise. In previous decades, Iran has used massive bomb attacks against US troops in Lebanon or Jewish and Israeli targets as far away as Argentina. Last week, the FBI intensified investigation and monitoring of 'sleeper cells' linked to Hezbollah in the US.
Reuters
22 minutes ago
- Reuters
Hague NATO summit protest shifts focus to Iran
THE HAGUE, June 22 (Reuters) - An anti-NATO protest in The Hague on Sunday shifted its focus to Iran after overnight U.S. strikes hit key nuclear sites there. The peaceful demonstration took place days before The Hague hosts a NATO summit. The planned protest against NATO's military policies pivoted to condemnation of the U.S. attacks on Iran, with participants voicing concern about rising tensions in the Middle East. Thousands marched toward the Peace Palace, home to the International Court of Justice, a Reuters witness said. Organizers estimated the crowd at 5,000, while police said they do not track attendance numbers. Protesters carried banners calling for de-escalation, diplomacy, and for NATO to be disbanded, with some saying "No Iran War" and "Hands off Iran". Iranian protester Nikita Shahbazi told Reuters it was "heartbreaking" to see what is going on in her home country. "I feel devastated. (The U.S. attacks) can trigger a wider war. It has opened the paths for illegal attacks on nuclear installations everywhere in the world." Protesters also opposed a proposed 5% defence spending target pushed by U.S. President Donald Trump and backed by NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, who hopes to secure consensus at the summit, beginning on Wednesday. "There's no need for this provocation, this 5% of GDP spending on weapons, that will benefit the military-industrial complex. This has nothing to do with the needs of people," said British protester Pippa Bartolotti.
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Hegseth's call for ‘peace' shows Trump thinks he can have it both ways despite his punishing Iran ‘Hammer' strike
It seemed cut and dry Saturday evening, as three sites central to Iran's nuclear program were pummeled by U.S. weaponry, that war in the Middle East had ensnared America once again and the prospect of another prolonged, costly struggle was likely. But as the president and his top deputies laid out their own vision for the future, they described a one-and-done effort to set Iran's weapon development efforts back 'years' while claiming that the administration remained committed to avoiding a Bush-style invasion aimed at toppling the Iranian government. Saturday's strike, they argued, could be the end of Iran's punishment from the United States — but only if Tehran toes the line. Vice President J.D. Vance outlined the White House's political goal in an interview Sunday with Meet the Press on NBC: 'We're not at war with Iran. We're at war with Iran's nuclear program.' And Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared of the U.S. president earlier Sunday at a press conference: 'He seeks peace, and Iran should take that path.' But Iranian officials have already dismissed the idea of letting Saturday's action go unanswered. Vowing retaliation, Iran's foreign minister also warned that peace talks were off the table after Saturday evening's direct involvement by the U.S. in an effort formerly solely involving the Israeli government aimed at dismantling Iran's nuclear weapons program. 'The events [of] this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences,' tweeted Abbas Aragchi, the Iranian foreign minister. He added on Sunday: 'Let's wait for our response, first. And when the aggression is ended, we decide how to engage in diplomacy once again." In the past, Iranian officials have largely backed down from escalation with the United States after a few military responses against bases that house U.S. forces in Iraq which caused minimal damage. The Trump administration appears to be hoping for a response in that vein once again as it postures threateningly against Tehran while claiming to have achieved its primary objectives against nuclear weapons advances. On Saturday evening, the president delivered an address in the immediate wake of the strikes. He, like Hegseth on Sunday, raved about how awe-inspiring and successful the U.S. military operation had been at achieving its objectives, claiming: "Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.' General Dan 'Razin'' Caine, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, offered a more grounded assessment alongside Hegseth on Sunday, telling reporters (while standing next to the effusive Hegseth) that it was 'way too early' to determine whether Iran still had nuclear capabilities. The reality for the administration is now obvious to all but those most caught up in the glory of American war fervor. If the U.S. was successful at seriously setting back the program, the risk of continued retaliation across the Middle East remains a possibility, though supporters of the president's decision argue that Iran's options to cause serious damage were few and far between. The strike was cheered by the U.K. government as well as the Atlantic Council, where experts likened the attack to the first Trump administration's killing of a top Revolutionary Guard official and predicted that Iran's response would be similarly muted. But others strongly disagree, and civil war threatens to engulf the American right as more and more neoconservatives clash with those in the party tired of the GOP-begun 'endless war' dynamic of the 2000s and 2010s. While the White House insists that this is not about regime change and de-escalation remains on the table, the hawkish wing of the president's party continues to publicly call for further devastating strikes on other Iranian targets, including the assassination of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. The latter option would be the most certain to trigger unrestrained war between Washington and Tehran, which after Saturday seemed alarmingly possible for even many of Trump's own supporters. The other question that remains unanswered: Is Iran's nuclear program truly destroyed? 'If it has been, then no further strikes will be required against sites related to that program, as the president seems to prefer,' wrote the Atlantic Council's Jonathan Panikoff, director of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative. 'But if it turns out the strikes were not completely effective, that Iran moved portions of its nuclear weapons program, or that it has secret nuclear sites, then it is unlikely this will be the end of these strikes as Trump has sought.' The president continues to have multiple forces pulling him in the direction of further military engagement, including members of his own political coalition at home and the Israeli government, one of his administration's closest allies abroad. After Saturday, that list could also include an armed response from Iran itself. With legislation representing a large part of his agenda slowly working its way through slim Republican majorities in Congress, Donald Trump has many reasons to avoid engaging America in a prolonged war. Not least of those reasons is the outcry of opposition from within his own party, still muted on Capitol Hill but deafening in the various corners of the 'extremely online' right, which makes up a key chunk of his most engaged supporters. That faction has been in full meltdown mode for more than a week now as Israel's conflict with Iran was renewed by Tel Aviv and the president made clear that he was giving serious thought to joining it, spurred by the claim that Iran's nuclear weapons development had resumed. Steve Bannon, chief strategist in Trump's first White House and leader of his own large following via his War Room podcast, had lunch with the president on Thursday — two and a half days before the attack commenced. Bannon, like others, continues to warn that the GOP president puts at risk his domestic policy agenda, with mass deportations at the center, by engaging the U.S. in a war. In reality, the administration has declined to release any evidence to that notion of Iran resuming nuclear weapons development, or even confirm whether the supposed evidence in question comes from U.S. intelligence sources or Israel's government — or another third party. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declined to do so again on Sunday.
